Why I Love My Ugly Little Liturgy

I love chant. I love vaulted ceilings. I love stained glass and incense, ancient gestures and profoundly freighted silence. Beauty is more than decoration: It nourishes the soul.

More than that, architectural and liturgical beauty have a higher purpose than to feed the senses: Beauty is one of the few fitting offerings we can make to a God whose sacrifice is already complete. Beauty lifts the mind and the soul; it disposes us to grace, and it aligns our hearts with everything that is good and true. I believe these things with all my heart, and would defend beauty till the end of the world.

On the other hand…

There is a case to be made for spending some time with ugliness. Specifically, ugliness at Mass.

You really don’t have to seek it out. Unless you’re cloistered, sooner or later you will find yourself in a parish that just doesn’t get it — doesn’t get beauty, doesn’t want it, chases it out with a stick every Sunday. The tabernacle will be hidden away, while the HVAC will be proudly on display in the beige-brick sanctuary, right behind the hovering un-crucifix made of chrome and burlap. The music will jangle and irritate; the priest will act like a cross between an infomercial huckster and your creepy uncle. The whole production, from the opening joke — I mean, the Introductory Rites — to the last hurrah — I mean, Final Blessing — will seem designed to irritate, to offend, and to cause you grief and pain.

And you know what? This is your big opportunity. You can either clench your teeth, wrap your scapulars around your ears to block out the tambourines, and hightail it out of there as soon as you can . . .

Or you can think to yourself, “Christ is here. And if he can stand it, then so can I.”

You may think I’m kidding, but I’m not. It’s good for us, every once in a while, to attend a liturgy that we think isn’t good enough. It’s good for us to have that sensation of being the only one in the room who comprehends the travesty that is happening around us. Why? Because at some point, in the middle of the noise and the irreverence and the foolish, happy-clappy songs, we’re going to have to go up for Communion. We will have to take God into our mouths. And if we have an honest bone in our bodies, we will have to think, “No, it’s not good enough. And neither am I.”

My soul is foolish. I’m cheap and jangly. I’m in poor taste, inadequate, irreverent, wanting and paltry in every way. My heart is made of little beige bricks and burlap. And for some reason, God keeps showing up anyway. He doesn’t sneer and hunker down and wait for it to be over when he comes into the tawdry temple of my soul. He doesn’t get out of there as soon as he can.

A little ugliness is good for us, folks. Taken in the proper doses in the right context, a little bad taste is something we need, because it tells us something about ourselves. Surrounded with nothing but beauty and elegance at all times, we can come to confuse good taste with good souls: We can think that we really are worthy, because here we are, chanting! It’s timeless! It’s ancient! It’s a worthy offering!

No, it’s not. No matter how glorious your favorite liturgy is, you’re still just some guy, just like any other guy. In fact, I’m afraid that too much beauty can have a coarsening effect. Just this week, I’ve heard devotees of the Traditional Latin Mass say that the Novus Ordo is “Mass for retards.” I heard a Melkite Catholic call the Roman Church “industrial-scale Christianity that turns the Mass into a Eucharist factory.”

Well, that is one road you can take: You can recoil from clumisiness and ugliness, and protect yourself with scathing insults and withering scorn. You can say, “Thank you, Lord, that I am not like one of these!”

Or you can say, “Thank you, Lord, for sending me here to this ugly Church. It helps me remember that I am not worthy that thou shouldst enter under my roof.”

God doesn’t come to you because you deserve it, or because you’ve done everything right. He doesn’t come because the house you’ve made for him is beautiful enough. He isn’t conjured up by the proper combinations of tones and attitudes. He comes to you because he loves you — because you need him. We all need him.

We should build beautiful churches. We should make our music lovely. I wish with all my heart that the Holy Spirit would send a divine wind to blow away every silly, vulgar liturgical innovation I’ve suffered through in the last 30 years. I wish that He would clean house! But since the Lord does not deem it time — let’s take advantage. Let’s learn what we can from ugliness. And let’s not add to it in our hearts.

Comments

In essence, this is what my Dad taught by example, when he took us children to the Spanish Mass because there were more families with children in attendance… he preferred it to the yuppier Mass…even though that one was in our mother tongue. He didn’t despise yuppies really, he just loved families with lots of children in them and felt more at home amongst these humbler folk, even though, their singing was awful, etc… The point you are making is if Christ is here, then I’m not suffering anything He’s not suffering too…and he loves us in spite of our shortcomings and even our sins.

Thank you for writing as you do.

Posted by Gregory on Monday, Aug 20, 2012 4:13 PM (EDT):

Simcha, if “a little ugliness is good for us”, how about a lot? Sorry, you are trying to make a pious point, but the Church has historically –and all the way up to and including Vatican II, if we take it at its word—has vehemently disagreed with you. It is, instead, beauty which, not only is most fitting to worship God, but, by contrast, serves ups the ugliness of ourselves, and, in fact, takes us out of ourselves. For 2,000 years, the Catholic Church (and most Protestant churches) abided by this rule, and for 1,000 years before that, so did Ancient Israel. That’s 3,000 years of Judaeo-Christian history. Could be it was all wrong and you’re right. But I will tell you, the ugliness of which you speak can be of spiritual benefit only under unsought, infrequent circumstances and only to those who can make an offering of it, but on a steady basis it will infect and poison all but the veritable victim soul. (The post of Scott just above testifies to this.) No, one does not need ugliness to be reminded of one’s interior ugliness. I know “non sum dignus.” The effect of being surrounded by such a hostile environment will but make me indifferent to it all, and, post haste, dull my interior life, confirming me in the conviction that, “If God can stand all this ugliness, then He can stand me. So why worry?” You got it wrong, Simcha, and, sadly, you communicated that same to countless others. Read more. Blog less. Come back in 30 years.

My cousin recommended this blog and she was totally right keep up the fantastic work!</PostText>

Posted by IrishEddieOHara on Tuesday, May 8, 2012 12:24 PM (EDT):

I LOVE what the Melkite said. And anyone who has experienced a Melkite Litugyr will immediately understand.

Posted by Scott on Sunday, Apr 29, 2012 12:47 AM (EDT):

Thank you so much for saying this. This is such a huge stumbling block in my religious life.

I am a 37-year-old raised in the post-Vatican II church. However, I am one of those odd ducks who drives forty minutes past six churches and a Jesuit university (that I could throw a softball at from my front yard) to go to an inner city church on the other side of town. I do this so so that I can kneel in a 19th century masterpiece of gothic woodwork with an ad orietum alter, side chapels, and gorgeous stained glass. There, a few sinners such as myself celebrate the Tridentine Mass with Gregorian chant. While I know in my heart that the Jesuit Ordus Novo version down the street is the same Mass, it literally pains me to sit through that liturgy. From the irreverent chatter, to the stream of preppyish-looking late-comers, to the decor (a mix of 1950s brutalism covered over with 1970s rainbow tapestries bespeaking a brotherhood of peace and love), to the dismal popular songs with piano accompaniment, to the I’m-ok-you’re-ok homily, to the backslapping sign of the peace and the “Our Father” with arms extended (as if each were his own priest), and the standing Agnus Dei… all of it… every last bit of it makes me feel like I am taking communion with a bunch of self-righteous gnostics. And I know that this church rakes in tens of thousands of dollars every Sunday, while our communion of working-class Catholics (many with large families) fights for its financial survival.

But every few weeks I make myself go. Why? Because I need it. I need to recognize these people as my brothers and sisters in Christ. I need to forgive them and to ask their forgiveness for every hurtful thing I have ever thought about them on account of their weird damaging ways. If St. Robert Bellarmine, St. Thomas More, or St. Theresa of Avila suddenly sprung out of time, I would like to think they immediately would understand where they were if they joined me at the Latin Mass, but would be utterly confused by modern version (even More, who would understand the lingo). However, I also want to believe in my heart of hearts, that once they settled down, they would realize (as I desperately try to do) that the Grace of the Holy Spirit and the Power of Our Lord Jesus Christ is no less or more present at either one.

Posted by James Walton on Tuesday, Apr 10, 2012 2:15 PM (EDT):

Beautifully put, Simcha. Thank you.

Posted by Jim on Saturday, Jan 28, 2012 9:14 PM (EDT):

Reminds me of a story about Flannery O’Connor. (For your TLM fans, that was the mass of O’Connor’s era.)

Flannery O’Connor grew up Catholic in the South. She said there were very few Catholics and many prejudices against them. She told the story of her best friend who was a Baptist. Flannery often invited her to Mass. Finally, one Sunday the little girl got permission from her mom to accept Flannery’s invitation. Flannery could not wait for the Mass to be over so she could ask her little friend whether she liked it. The little girl said: “WOW. You Catholics really have something special. The sermon was so boring, the music was lousy, the priest mumbled the prayers of a language nobody could understand, and all those people were there!”

Posted by anon in fla on Tuesday, Sep 27, 2011 1:07 PM (EDT):

Mike: where do you live? I know you are quoting Tolkien but here women go to church in pants and tank tops with scarves on their shoulders because it is 90 deg and hot…. very hot till late or mid Oct next month.
It gets soooo bad that we don’t see you. We would love to see you here and enjoy the joyous sacrifice of sweating in a land where no one up north wants to visit.

We miss you everyone. Please do more penance with us. We have insight about this. We see things in the mirages of the church doors due tothe heat that no one else sees. God has blessed us sooooo much. We get dizzy and are so blessed that we reek of body odor when we put on a proper sweater in the properly dressed fall. It is exciting for you?
Please come down here and teach us how to properly make a sacrifice in this near 100 degree weather. We love you everyone. We need you.

Posted by Elena on Tuesday, Sep 27, 2011 9:06 AM (EDT):

If the Liturgy has become little and ugly, who has made it that way? The Lord or us?

Posted by Frank on Tuesday, Sep 27, 2011 8:09 AM (EDT):

PonyPam, beauty may or may not be universally objective, but good tastea and manners are. When something or someone is in bad taste, nothing can change that. Methinks dear lady that you might be defensive in regard to one of the issues Marguerite has raised in her blog. Let me ask you something, when someone is trying to pray after the Mass and there are people gabbing right in front of them, who is looking whose nose down at them? Are the blabbers being considerate (1) to the Lord and (2) to their fellow worshippers? Charity works both ways.

Posted by cam on Monday, Sep 26, 2011 4:27 PM (EDT):

I look forward to the day of well-executed liturgy with beautiful music everywhere or, at least, reverent low masses. In the meantime, I shall make do with the sincere efforts that the faithful make today.

Posted by Marguerite on Monday, Sep 26, 2011 4:01 PM (EDT):

In response to Pony Pam, beauty is objective if it is created by God and subjective if it is “created” by man. An example would be a sunset. Nobody would argue that a sunset is not beautiful. This is objective beauty. But one can like or dislike an artist’s rendition of that same sunset. This is subjective beauty since it is based on one’s opinion, emotions, experience, etc. Getting back to the Mass, the beauty of the bread of angels being given to man through the sacrifice of Our Savior on the Cross (albeit a horrific death) is always seen as beautiful. The external forms of worship man’s contribution in music, decor, dress can in all honesty be ugly and distracting and sometimes is very much so.

Posted by Marguerite on Monday, Sep 26, 2011 3:43 PM (EDT):

The author already has made a judgment on the Mass she attends—it’s little and it’s ugly. Need anything more be said? It’s one thing to draw beauty out of ugliness but that does not justify producing ugliness in the first place, especially at the Liturgy. Judging the aesthetics of the most holiest form of worship is something good and should not be misconstrued as judging those who attend “ugly, little liturgies”. Let’s not use relativism and minimalist nihilism as standards of acceptance when worshipping the Lord. Let’s give Him our very best!

Posted by anon in fla on Monday, Sep 26, 2011 12:04 PM (EDT):

Also one other question: why is it that those in their 20s and 30s look more at exteriors than a personal relationship with Jesus and His Mystical Body, the Church as more important than the glitter of stuff? Liturgy is important but what goes on in your prayer life just as important. Go to Africa and Brazil in the jungle or China where they rarely have your churches. I live in Florida and back in the day and all over the south, churches are aluminum buildings because there were few Catholics. We don’t overemphasize this but our dioceses are taking people frustrated with this viewpoint of must have this or that like a sic better than us northern Catholic Church.

Remember our dioceses here are growing from people moving from your dioceses. We are not so pessimistic and not all the windows are stained glass here with dark marble. The sunshine flows through. We thank God for our good weather even when it is hot. You should visit and see the beauty around the church outside that we can see with those windows.

The Baptists and other denoms are leaving theirs and coming to ours.

Posted by anon in fla on Monday, Sep 26, 2011 11:44 AM (EDT):

Is what is going on in your own heart ugly? Do you view it as ugly? I don’t think God views it as ugly. Even I have my moments.

Somehow God is present beyond what we culturally consider as beauty.

God sees us as the beautiful people He made.

Posted by PonyPam on Monday, Sep 26, 2011 11:44 AM (EDT):

Marguerite, along with all the other things you list as being distractions from the heavenly experience of the Liturgy, let us not forget to also include the ugliness of looking down one’s nose at those who do not happen to share our particular taste in aesthetics. Beauty is not universally objective.

Posted by Marguerite on Monday, Sep 26, 2011 8:47 AM (EDT):

Anything that distracts one from worshipping the Lord properly, i.e., ugly decor, lack of decorum in the House of the Lord, unnecessary talking, vulgar dress, loud music, silly jokes/homilies is ugly and nothing can change that. Ugly is as ugly does. Lex orandi, lex credendi—we pray as we believe. Yes, the Lord has to put up with a lot of our ugliness, i.e., our sins and offenses, but does this mean we should wallow in them or ask the Lord to help us celebrate them? Our worship is not supposed to be a reflection of society’s culture but of the culture of Heaven. You should leave Mass knowing you were in Heaven for a short while. That’s why young people find the Mass “irrelevant”. It’s no different than the culture they are living in.

Posted by enness on Thursday, Aug 25, 2011 2:55 AM (EDT):

This is precisely why I couldn’t stand more than a day or two on a certain music blog, with otherwise decent folks who nevertheless confuse subjective and objective, seem to think the words they choose don’t matter, and through the lens of their own zeal can’t see the condescension, impatience, etc. that is so palpably obvious and hurtful to others. As a professional musician myself I certainly don’t love every song or every rendition, or disagree that there is a wide body of stuff that we can all point out as inappropriate, but I don’t appreciate being treated like a rube because I’m not groaning for deliverance from Marty Haugen (whose Mass settings I have grown up with and kinda sorta liked—shocking, I know) or because I tear up at a ‘Protestant’ hymn (as if a hierarchical collection of frequencies could itself be religious!). I need some time and help and compassion, not to be tied to the back of a pickup truck and dragged into the future (or the past, for that matter). And while I realize the world does not revolve around me, Christ did die for me too for some reason, unworthy though I am, so if the EF makes me feel like a spectator and not a (grateful) participant then I’m not going to go to it if given a choice.

I love and support Mother Church and have no issue with her. It’s some of her sheep I’m…well…less than thrilled with. I hope this whole thing can unite us instead of driving in a wedge of resentment.

Posted by JR on Sunday, Jun 26, 2011 1:19 PM (EDT):

Her case for mediocrity or ugliness is utterly astonishing. I read her piece in the most charitable way possible but fail to see the wisdom in anything she said. Its false humility and sinful to find any satisfaction in ugliness when our God is pure beauty. Its one thing to be stuck with an ugly mass its another to find solace in it.

Posted by dominic on Friday, Jun 24, 2011 12:34 PM (EDT):

What a great piece! What an authentically Catholic attitude! But it won’t sit well with some tridentine devotees. I remember sitting with just such a young man in one of the churches Simcha describes, while he expressed an intention to go to the seminary and become a priest, but “I would never do it here, and for this.” But these churches too are part of the Church, and what kind of priest has such visceral aversion for the “ugliness” that he wouldn’t be ordained unless it could be in a pristine, perfect (outwardly) liturgical setting. So let me add my voice to Simcha’s: “I too love my ugly little liturgy”.

And for Miguel: it isn’t the individual that is being celebrated here, but precisely the opposite. It would be a wrong emphasis on the individual to insist on all the externals I might find so pleasing. Those whose “piety” is excessively scandalized by these ugly liturgies that they cannot bring themselves to love them, likely would also have been unable to stay with the Lord during the bloody sacrifice of Calvary. But to be fair they would be in pretty good company, so don’t lose heart!

Posted by Thomas Cole on Monday, Jun 20, 2011 9:28 PM (EDT):

Thanks for posting the article it is good to ponder these things! It is, indeed, great to recall the good that can be gleaned from the often unavoidable ugly liturgy, and to remind ourselves to guard against pride. Still, I am not comfortable with her making ugly liturgy sound like a positive good. Liturgy is fundamentally about God, not us, and he is, in justice, owed beautiful or at least licit liturgy. Certainly valuable lessons and spiritual growth can be brought from a negligently or illicilty conducted liturgy, as with bad priests or broken marriages, but that doesn’t mean we really need any of these things or should view them as goods in and of themselves!

Posted by Rémy on Friday, Jun 10, 2011 4:28 PM (EDT):

I agree with every single word you wrote. Every single word. I’ve felt the same. One priest in my parish decided to organise a “Carnival Mass” because there’s a big carnival taking place in town once a year. People come for the music and for the fun of coming drunk to church. I was standing in the back with all those who really didn’t care. And I refrained from crying. They came for the music (bagpipes, it’s indeed very nice in a church) and made fun of everything else. Then, someone those people complaining and making so much fun of it all went to communion, and I was horrified. However, I came to the same conclusions as you. Thanks Simcha :)

Posted by Ferdinand Gajewski on Tuesday, Jun 7, 2011 11:25 PM (EDT):

Seems to me the ugliness she loves to love may be telling her the parish is not in communion with the local bishop, and perhaps the local bishop, as well, is in de facto schism from the Holy See. I would just get up and walk out of the church at the first sign of dissent.

Posted by Jimmy Martello on Monday, May 9, 2011 12:11 PM (EDT):

Wow! Harsh, but right on the money. Anyone who has ever attended a “living and vibrant” liturgy can relate to this article.

Posted by Joey Smalls on Wednesday, May 4, 2011 4:31 AM (EDT):

At times, especially in the final paragraph, this seems a bash on Vatican II… masquerading as humility

Posted by Stephen Hand on Tuesday, Mar 29, 2011 9:00 AM (EDT):

This is a very powerful piece showing a very Catholic soul. Thank you.

Posted by Mike Wallacavage on Friday, Mar 18, 2011 6:19 PM (EDT):

I am reminded of Tolkien’s letter on mass and Communion:

“The only cure for sagging of fainting faith is Communion. Though always Itself, perfect and complete and inviolate, the Blessed Sacrament does not operate completely and once for all in any of us. Like the act of Faith it must be continuous and grow by exercise. Frequency is of the highest effect. Seven times a week is more nourishing than seven times at intervals. Also I can recommend this as an exercise (alas! only too easy to find opportunity for): make your communion in circumstances that affront your taste. Choose a snuffling or gabbling priest or a proud and vulgar friar; and a church full of the usual bourgeois crowd, ill-behaved children - from those who yell to those products of Catholic schools who the moment the tabernacle is opened sit back and yawn - open necked and dirty youths, women in trousers and often with hair both unkempt and uncovered. Go to communion with them (and pray for them). It will be just the same (or better than that) as a mass said beautifully by a visibly holy man, and shared by a few devout and decorous people. (It could not be worse than the mess of the feeding of the Five Thousand - after which [our] Lord propounded the feeding that was to come.)

Out of the darkness of my life, so much frustrated, I put before you the one great thing to love on earth: the Blessed Sacrament… There you will find romance, glory, honour, fidelity, and the true way of all your loves on earth, and more than that: Death: by the divine paradox, that which ends life, and demands the surrender of all, and yet by the taste (or foretaste) of which alone can what you seek in your earthly relationships (love, faithfulness, joy) be maintained, or take on that complexion of reality, of eternal endurance, which every man’s heart desires.”

- J.R.R. Tolkien, The Letters of J.R.R. Tolkien

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Mar 16, 2011 4:47 PM (EDT):

Oh, Mark, thank you! I got chills on viewing the architecture section, upon seeing the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe there. I have been there, and it is truly a beautiful place.

Posted by Mark on Wednesday, Mar 16, 2011 3:41 PM (EDT):

Dear Simcha - I think you’ll enjoy this! :-)

thesacredarts.org

Posted by John Schuh on Saturday, Mar 5, 2011 8:21 PM (EDT):

Music is a matter of taste, of course, but nowadays even popular music tends to be unsingable. As to guitar music, it all depends. I like almost all Spanish music. The problem with the English-language stiff is that is comes out of the ‘60s and the lyics are banal at best. On the other hand, the choirs of the ‘50s in the smaller churches used dreck such as “Mother dearest,” and many such bad stuff.

Posted by mary peck on Saturday, Mar 5, 2011 4:40 PM (EDT):

As a liturgical musician, I’m not crazy about comments like these, but to each his/her own. When people say they don’t like guitar music, it sounds like sour grapes. Most non-musicians have no clue as to how much talent and work is involved. If you don’t like it, go to a Mass without music. What I really find offensive - and I know you were quoting someone else and probably meant no harm, but still - is the use of the “r” word. The fact that some developmentally disabled people - one of whom is my son - were made to feel so unwelcome by some individuals in our Catholic parish that they started to attend a “special Mass” for the developmentally disabled at the neighboring Episcopal church. The lack of tolerance is so sad.

Posted by John Schuh on Saturday, Mar 5, 2011 4:07 PM (EDT):

@ carol: Great story! Yes, people who do not actually remember the old mass forget that 1) the mass was often indifferent said, the sermons about money and the choirs dreadful. 2) I went to a Mexican church in the Rio Grande Valley, and even though the pastor spoke English, the Mexican ladies said their rosaries all during mass—outloud—I seldom went back, found an Anglo church a few miles away, where the young priest was teaching the dialogue mass. The liturgical reformers were right on some points, but than, as so often happens, they went on a bender and changed so much so fast they literally lost many older Catholics.

Posted by Carol on Saturday, Mar 5, 2011 12:20 PM (EDT):

You know, even TLM can be ugly. I know this firsthand. Back in the days before Vatican II, when all we had was the Latin Mass, we also had a Monsignior for pastor who had the absolute worst, monotone, off key, nasal voice that has ever murdered the sung liturgy. His voice was truly horrible, and people did avoid going to the High Mass for this reason. And for whatever reason we also had an ugly church building—a temporary structure which was little better than a Quonset hut while we parishoners (actually, the adults of my parents’ generation) scraped and sacrificed to donate to the building fund for a new permanent structure. Except the permanent structure that was first built was the parish hall, not the church itself. The church wasn’t built for another twenty years, and by that time I had moved away. Anyways, when Monsignior sung High Mass on Sundays, it was an assault to the eardrums of everyone in the congregation. One hot summer day the doors were open (no air conditioning in the temporary structure) and a neighborhood dog managed to wander in. As Monsignior started to “sing” the Kyrie, this little dog sat down, threw his head back, and HOWLED! I’m sure that Our Lord and all the angels in heaven laughed themselves into hiccups at that incident. But the great blessing was that Monsignior no longer offered High Mass after that week, it was left to the assistant pastor, who had a rich tenor voice. Maybe it was the Holy Spirit that inspired that little doggy to come in and “assist” at Mass just to put a merciful stop to the weekly caterwaul.

Posted by GARY THE ALLIGATOR on Friday, Mar 4, 2011 7:13 PM (EDT):

I FEEL VINDICATED BY THE STANCE I HAVE TAKEN TOO, AS IT KEEPS MY PANTS FROM FALLING DOWN! THEY WON’T LET ME HAVE A BELT!

Posted by Michelle on Friday, Mar 4, 2011 7:06 PM (EDT):

I feel vindicated regarding the stance that I have held, given the fact that both Cardinals Burke and Canizares-Lloera have stated that bad liturgies are problematic and pose serious dangers to one’s faith life.

Maybe the article should be re-read in light of the Cardinals’ statements.

Posted by Alphonsus on Friday, Mar 4, 2011 12:39 AM (EDT):

Good thoughts. I agree with the main point that if Jesus can tolerate we can try as well to be humble and to realize (as in the Donatist controversey) that Christ is present, regardless of the degree of holiness of the priest, the people, or the music, or general spirit of the liturgy being celebrated. That being said, the article focuses on how it can be good for US, and how it can keep US humble, etc to put up with this. But, the number one purpose of worship is not us, but proper glory and worship of the Holy Trinity. As well, the liturgy ought to form Christ in us in fullness. It is harder for God to be glorified and worshipped properly, and for the fulness of Christ to be formed in the people as one body when the liturgy is “a joke” as you put it. We live in a crazy time in Church history and many people may have to tolerate these kind of poorly celebrated masses for a time until they can eithe rfind a better parish or hopefully be instrumental in changing the culture of the parish they find themselves in. Lastly, this dynamic you speak of (that Christ is present even amongst such poor music and liturgy) is one more reason to be Catholic! Thanks for your good blog.

Posted by thereserita on Thursday, Mar 3, 2011 2:46 AM (EDT):

Simcha, You are an awesome Catholic writer. Best I’ve read on the Liturgy Wars ever. Of course, you have to have the heart of a ‘little child’, like Jesus said, to accept what you’re saying here!
Thx to whoever at NCR recruited you.

Posted by John Schuh on Wednesday, Mar 2, 2011 5:58 PM (EDT):

So you pray, so you believe. I have to believe that many of the “ugly” masses I have attended over the years were presided over by priests who lost their faith somewhere along the line.

Posted by Hugolino on Wednesday, Mar 2, 2011 4:55 PM (EDT):

“But for the grace of God there go I.”

According to a textual search of the web page, no one has used that phrase in this article or in the many comments except for Mike. I presume he is paraphrasing someone?

Mike, who are you talking to? (the funny part about an essay like this is that everyone thinks everyone else is being judgmental and condescending!)

Posted by mike on Wednesday, Mar 2, 2011 12:47 AM (EDT):

You’ve turned judgmental and condescending into something of an art form. “But for the grace of God there go I.” This is sad.

Posted by Jo Flemings on Tuesday, Mar 1, 2011 12:12 PM (EDT):

I wonder which one is more offensive to Our Lord, a poorly offered but licit Mass, or my judgmental or condemning heart as I listen to or later discuss a poorly offered Mass? For which one of these things am I most responsible? And if my responsibilities are defined in both areas, how do I best fulfill them according to Jesus’ desired delineation or defined duty for me? And lastly, is it fitting or appropriate for me to discuss these things in this manner via combox comment in the public forum?

This is a complicated but very meaningful and timely conversation about a variety of things intertwined. Parsing them out then addressing them one at a time from the concentric circles of virtues leading from the indiviudal out to the community would be a propitious catechesis.

Posted by chantal on Tuesday, Mar 1, 2011 4:53 AM (EDT):

Thanks Simcha for the article. As a revert, Mass for me is, Mass and I´m just glad to have it. I vary between a number of parishes in my city, depending on the weekend activities. I usually go to a Spanish Mass with, guitars, South American flute, drums, everyone sings, lively clappy Mass.(There is a beautiful hush at the consecration). The first Sunday of the month I go to the Basilica because they have a 15 min children´s adoration after Mass. That Mass is completely the opposite, with a large Organ and one cantor. It is full however, and many people sing. If somehow I still don´t make it to a morning Mass, I go to the inner city, native Mass, which has a disable person, singing off key with a guitar, a rainbow decoration, which made me think of my sister’in’law who is an atheist, lesbian and they sing Happy Birthday and Happy anniversary at the end of Mass to celebrate life events. It is still a beautiful Mass welcoming people where they are at. I have also been to a French, boring Mass that is celebrated in a funeral home. (My family is French and Spanish and we live in an English area). If I was in Africa, I suspect the Masses would have lots of drums and perhaps dancing. I have been to a Urkrainian Catholic Mass and enjoyed their liturgy and learned to know what is going on. I haven´t yet been to a TL mass but I´m looking forward to be able to go soon.
I like the NO Mass. I get amazed thinking that the SAME MASS is said all over the world, and I am united with my friends in France, Spain, South America, ect. God is there, loving and embracing us where we are at to raise us up and walk with us, in our sinfulness and wretchness, and I weep in thanksgiving. I find it amazing that in the Roman NO Mass, it is the same Mass, the same readings and same prayers, ALL OVER the World.

In response to an earlier comment, GOD comes down to our ordinarily life to raise us up, out of the ordinary.

I also had to learn that GOD is so big that we can’t worship every facet of Him all at the same time. To some He gives a deep understanding and desire of worship of His majesty, to others; of his Justice, or his mercy, or his childlike nature, or his holy beauty. Since we are all at different stages in our life, He comes to us, in each of our particular cultures and forms of worship. All the various Masses are also reflect us.

God has given some a deep respect and desire to worship him in all his majesty, beauty and grandeur: and so they are pulled to the Traditional Mass and desire for greater reverence. But God is still there in the off-beat, off-key singing, quick, ugly Mass. Since God is there I still go and weep and beg for his Mercy for my messed up family and this messed up world. He stills comes into my heart and whispers “Be still child and know that I am God!”

Posted by Greg on Tuesday, Mar 1, 2011 3:10 AM (EDT):

The English translation of the mass has become increasingly clunky over the years. The Anglican/Episcopal Book of Common Prayer (1952) is a much better (more poetic and graceful) English version of the Latin mass. E.g. “Say but the word and my soul…” vs “But only say the word and my soul….” The Church had to add the redundant “only” to force a clank at the holiest part of the mass.

Posted by Scmidt on Tuesday, Mar 1, 2011 3:04 AM (EDT):

Well, according to Catherine Emmerich a lot of evil can come from a badly said mass.I for one don’t want that for myself or children. Say you?

Posted by Elizabeth K. on Saturday, Feb 26, 2011 10:16 PM (EDT):

MB, I like the word “smuggery.” I invented it as a portmanteau of “smug” and “thuggery” to describe political shenanigans of which I personally disapprove. I now hope that by sending it into the internetosphere, it will come back to me one day as a real word. Go forth, smuggery.

Posted by Kahili on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 10:30 PM (EDT):

Athol, I did not know that! Cool, thanks.

Posted by Athol on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 10:12 PM (EDT):

No. Hebrew. The Passover Liturgy is always in Hebrew. The first Mass was at a Passover liturgy so it would definitely be Hebrew. While Aramaic was commonly spoken by the Jews in the Galilee as their common language, this was not true for Judea and Jerusalem where Hebrew was used. Anyway as a Jewish liturgy it would have been in Hebrew. Aramaic and Greek came when Gentiles who spoke those languages entered the Church as they didn’t know Hebrew. whereas all Jews knew liturgical Hebrew even if they didn’t speak it as their mother tongue.

Posted by Kahili on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 9:57 PM (EDT):

Athol, amen brother. But wouldn’t the original mass language have been Aramaic, not Hebrew?

Posted by Athol on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 7:08 PM (EDT):

Well if one really wants to be a traditionalist then they should advocate for the original Mass- that Mass was in Hebrew- not Latin or Greek.

Posted by KJD on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 4:05 PM (EDT):

I grew up with the Traditional Latin Mass, in a great parish. Haven’t been to one lately, but let me tell you how it was: the nuns would lead us kids in the Rosary during the Mass! Yes, all those reverent people with their rosaries in hand, praying while the Mass went on. Priests would gain fame for how fast they could tear through the Latin—7-minute Masses for those in a hurry! The Mass was basically the priest and his altar boy. Many people had missals with the translation, but most people did their own worship, or lack of it. You attended Mass; you didn’t participate. Oh, I loved it. Knew enough Latin to follow along. Loved the smells of incense and the Latin chant. But get real, people. Bring that Mass back universally and you will see the same problems. I think the reason the TDM is so loved right now is because it is an exception and people do love to have their quiet time with God. That New Ordo Mass everyone loves to hate requires you to participate! Very little time for private devotion. But this is a public liturgy! For those who don’t want any music, there is always an early “quiet Mass.” Even then, you are expected to take part in the responses. Hard to get in your Rosary or finish your private prayers when you have to speak up once in a a while and the priest says words you actually understand. I’m tone-deaf and totally don’t “get” music, so there is no good or bad music for me. Our pastor always has a seminarian helping out, so we get to see the future. Let me tell you, these are fantastic young men. And I’ve got great priests. You may have actors; I have humble men. Christ is truly present in my parish. Whether you would call it an “ugly” one, I don’t know, but I love it. (Note this is not a comment on Simcha’s post. What she says about remembering that I’m not worthy myself, is true no matter where you stand.) I could give you paragraphs for the Latin Mass or for the New Ordo. See advantages in both. See problems with both. Isn’t it nice that Jesus founded His Church on a Rock and sent the Holy Spirit to keep it safe? So I accept what Rome decides. A very long time ago they dropped the lovely Greek Mass to institute the ugly Latin of the people (though they left the Kyrie in Greek). Recently, they dropped that lovely Latin to institute the ugly languages of the people. Sorry, got to stop.

Posted by maria on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 2:10 PM (EDT):

Out of all the sharp and shinny tools the Lord could have chosen He picked up an old and rusty one and made it work right…God is sooooo good!!!!

Posted by L Katherine Baker on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 1:49 PM (EDT):

Thoughts from a convert from cradle Roman Catholic to Orthodox Christian:
There is a lot of truth in what Mrs. Fischer says - and the Orthodox would do well to apply what she is saying to their approach to liturgy—that is—I need to approach God in humility and not imagine that I can “produce God with the special tones and rites.”
But, my own conservative Catholic college education taught me about the transcendentals: truth, beauty, goodness, oneness. That God is true, good, one and beautiful. Beauty is not just a thin veneer that we apply over the top of things but real beauty participates in who God is. There are things that can be so ugly that they are theologically incorrect, misleading, heretical.
The actual RC experience of parish life is often so ugly that it is heretical. That people can pray with any theological truth is IN SPITE of their environment, not because of it. It leaves worshipers in the strange situation of thinking maybe they should just stay home rather than place themselves in an “occasion of sin” (weather it be from being ca,joled into singing heretical songs or just getting so angry we are tempted to hatred). It leaves worshipers betrayed.
It also completely over-burdens the priest and religious ed teachers to didactically make up for the deficiencies of the liturgy. Facing my future as a DRE (director of religious education) in an RC parish I was completely overwhelmed with the thought of trying to teach everything that one should know about God—while the very rites of my church called to question everything I was teaching in the class afterward.
I am sure you are aware how few RCs really know that the Eucharist is the body and blood, soul and divinity of Christ. Very few . . . and those who do know this know it b/c they have been TAUGHT it—not b/c they know it and feel it in the way they worship. They know it IN SPITE of the fact that their own parish churches have no visible tabernacles, discourage or outlaw genuflections, kneeling or other signs of devotion and sometimes hand it out with very little ceremony.
I was often struck when teaching catechism with how many times I would begin the lesson with, “it may look like we believe x but really we hold Y to be true.”
A person with his 5 senses intact and a child’s intelligence can sit in an Orthodox church even without a service and be educated in his faith by his surroundings—and at the very least easily come up with 100 questions to ask the priest later. I have been in RC churches that are so disorienting you are not quite sure what is the front and the back—- they are DEVOID of theological significance and apparently, purposefully so. There is nothing there. Nothing that teaches, nothing that inspires—the Eucharist is usually not there—or if it is, it is hidden. The rites themselves are often worse. How did this happen? It is a tragedy.
Mrs. Fisher is clearly trying to make the best of it (“keep calm and carry on”) but it leaves one asking: if the papacy is so important to order of the church—if papal infallibility is true why have the people been left by that powerful authority with things as they are? These issues of liturgy must not be important. But after one has worshiped in an orthodox liturgy—in spite of its weaknesses and the sins and failings of the priest and the people and your own—you know that you have participated in something that is greater than yourself—something that engages your heart and mind and soul and yet goes beyond and is not limited to your puny understanding either. I now am utterly convinced that liturgy MATTERS. How can you “LOVE your ugly little liturgy” when it is teaching something HERETICAL to your children about the God that you serve? It is only possible for one to say this if one thinks its all one has—and Mrs. Fisher pretty much says this at the end of her essay.
Mrs Fisher uses the phrase “every once in awhile” when she talks about encountering this “ugliness” but for the average American RC this IS their whole lifetime church experience. Is it any wonder that the church is in the state its in?
I have found a spiritual home for myself and my growing family in the Orthodox Church. You do have an alternative in a revered, ancient tradition with its roots in the apostles just as Rome.
Respectfully, L. Katherine Baker

I think this is a breakthrough. I believe this has been very close to Simcha’s point all along.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 12:48 PM (EDT):

“it’s like my Guardian Angel sets off a battle cry in my brain “I am a child of The Most High God no one pushes me out of where He sends me!”

Amazing words, Maria! That’s just beautiful.

Posted by maria on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 1:58 AM (EDT):

Mr. Fisher, I’m sorry to have missed the “husband” next to Simcha’s name on the post. Guess it’s time for new glasses. You are most welcome. I am by no means the exception. The ladies at Church have served as good role models for me. The good Lord uses everything for the good of those who love Him. That’s in The Bible can’t remember where just now. He used those ugly days to stiffen my resolve now when I encounter prejudice it’s like my Guardian Angel sets off a battle cry in my brain “I am a child of The Most High God no one pushes me out of where He sends me!” probably he does that so I won’t chicken out. God bless you and your lovely family

Posted by Simcha's husband on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 1:20 AM (EDT):

Maria,

I was the one who wrote that about the TLMers, not Simcha. Thank you for your generous words. I do wish there were more TLM folks like you and your family.

Posted by maria on Friday, Feb 25, 2011 1:03 AM (EDT):

Simcha, I was out or I would have written this sooner…No need for you to hold your breath here you go. I maria who attend the TLM do with every fiber of my being condemn Anti-Semitism or prejudice against any human being where ever it may be found. I am a Hispanic, divorced mom and the people at my church have gone out of their way to include my child and me in every function church and private. Believe me I understand your pain. When we legally entered this country in the 60’s we were foreigners and poor. We moved to Long Island. We were the only Hispanics in the town, in the school, in the Church. Good grief! Judging by their behavior we may have been the only ones they’d ever seen. My family and I saw prejudice up close sometimes it got close enough to draw blood. So you will understand my abhorrence of prejudice and how I would do the possible and the impossible to see to it my child got no where near it. I have never, ever heard any one at our Church disparage any one but maybe that is because we are such a diverse group. I am so very sorry for the pain that you have been caused. There are sinners everywhere and church is no different.
I remain your sister in Christ,
Maria

Posted by Nina on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 11:41 PM (EDT):

To be sure. I couldn’t agree more with your final point, Simcha. I am just saddened that you and your family have been so scandalized by those who claim to be the “true” Catholics but have hearts of stone. I wish you could meet and know the people I have, that not only love the external beauty and outward reverence, but show through their very lives, that they have been inwardly transformed by it, and are very beautiful souls, indeed.

This has actually been my personal experince, the opposite of yours——for instance, the support for bearing many children, home education, traditional family life and discipline, persevering during marital challenges, standing confidently when choosing to resist the culture, have not generally gone hand in hand with my local OF communities and priestly counsel. I’m not saying people aren’t *nice*. But niceness doesn’t get you through those precarious times and life decisions. .

If you and Mr. F. ever make it out my way, we would be overjoyed to be graced with your presence, and to meet all of the little Fishies!!! God bless you, both, too, and peace. :)

Posted by Athol on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 9:23 PM (EDT):

Simcha that reminds me of the passage in Scripture about those who have the outward form of our religion but lack the inner power of it. Its in 2 Timothy I think.

Posted by Athol on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 9:13 PM (EDT):

Don’t change-keep speaking from the heart-whether we agree or not at least it will be interesting . You write in a charmingly Jewish manner that hits the heart. I rather like the Oscar Wilde statement “It is absurd to divide people into good and bad. People are either charming or tedious.” You are definitely charming. Don’t let the tedious ones get you down. cheers, thanks and shalom.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 8:46 PM (EDT):

And thank you, Athol! The main reason I make a big fuss out of being a “Hebrew Catholic” is to explain why I talk this way.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 8:45 PM (EDT):

You know, I believe a huge part of my husband’s point was that we keep hearing: beauty is so essential, we simply can’t have anything of worth unless beauty is there. If beauty is missing, then there’s no point sticking around. Well, I visited that schismatic Church that my husband described, and I think it had all the hallmarks that Michelle and others would have approved of: it looked just GREAT, from the outside- Latin, veils, reverence, bells, incense, and all. It would have followed all those liturgical documents to a T. But it was rotten to the core.
//
So my point is, there is a real danger in making too strong of a correlation, if you focus EXCLUSIVELY on externals. Clearly, external beauty is not enough to keep you in God’s good graces. And my MAIN point is—well, if external beauty can go along with inward evil, then how can you be so sure that external shabbiness can’t go along with great inward goodness? Maybe it’s more rare, but some seem to believe that it can’t ever happen, and that’s just ridiculous.

Posted by Simcha's husband on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 8:31 PM (EDT):

Nina, if only more TLMers were like you. God Bless.

Posted by Nina on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 8:23 PM (EDT):

Oh, wow. I hadn’t read your preceding comment before mine just now. Seriously? I am absolutely sick at heart after reading those sentences.

Posted by Nina on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 8:19 PM (EDT):

Well, now you’ve met me! :)

To have either one of those ungodly attitudes would be reprehensible to me. I would be so ashamed. And I would be devastated to hear any of that nonsense come out of the mouths of people at my beloved parish. Never, ever have. Truly.

I *have* heard anti-NO comments come out of the mouths of a couple of those attending the SSPX community. I have never heard an anti-Semitic or rascist slur of any type. But then again, it is true, I don’t know many in that community or spend much time with those folks (only one, really).

But I have spent years and years with the TLM FSSP community (again, under the Holy Father) and have only been edified and inspired by the majority of people, who love and fear the Lord, and for the most part, one another! Knowing these families and priests has made me a better person and helped me through tremendously trying times. Again, these are not hypocrites or pharisees….these are people walking their talk. Maybe I’m just very blessed. But I doubt it. I am not the type that has rose-colored glasses on. Of course we have the trying person or two that is in every community. What is a family for but to bear one another and get over things? We have our ups and downs and little parish controversies….who doesn’t?

Please give a valid EF Mass with a godly, well-formed priest another try someday. Once upon a time, I never thought I would “fit in” there due to my own biases and pre-conceived notions. I then wouldn’t have known the beauty and richness and fullness that was there for me, and for my children, and how it would affect our lives.

Posted by Simcha's husband on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 8:10 PM (EDT):

Actually had the pleasure of speaking with a TLMer about a year ago, from a totally different group. I learned, 1. Jews are not good people. 2. Albert Einstein stole the special theory of relativity, because he’s a Jew. And, 3. Mel Gibson’s marital infidelity was caused by THE JOOOOOOOS.

Phooey.

Posted by Athol on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 8:09 PM (EDT):

Well said Harvey and I like the humour. I have nothing against the Latin Mass just some of the crazies it attracts. If you love the Latin Mass and can cope with them I am happy for you to go. Some of my friends go to the TLM and they are also members of the Association of Hebrew Catholics. In fact many Hebrew Catholics really enjoy the Latin Mass.

Posted by Michelle on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 7:57 PM (EDT):

There has been a lot of ugliness in this thread, specifically by those who do not agree with me. Disagreeing with me is fine, but, when these remarks are peppered with sarcasm, an uncharitable tone and downright rudeness, it makes me wonder if these folks have any real understanding of what the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is.

Mr. Fisher, with all due respect, you are basing your entire opinion of those who favor the Extraordinary Form of the Mass by an unpleasant experience with one group, sadly, a group that is not even in communion with Rome. Perhaps if you read the Holy Father’s motu propio liberalizing the use of the EF Mass, it might bring a different perspective on things. The Holy Father has suggested that perhaps there could be mutual enrichment between the two forms of the Mass.

Posted by Harvey on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 7:44 PM (EDT):

Maria:

The point of the post was how to handle ugly liturgies when you can’t do anything about it. You’re still fighting the “when you can’t do anything about it” and everyone agrees with you. Change what you can - got it. Good lesson.

By the way, I attend the TLM. There are lots of crazy people there, but that’s not why I go. The merits or de-merits of a particular form of the Mass stand on its own. It’s stupid to debate it here.

And I think that people should be sarcastic and witty, especially when defending wives. Or in “Mr. Simcha’s case” just one wife.

Posted by Athol on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 7:34 PM (EDT):

Michelle you have to be joking- you come here with your nasty little agenda of twisting everything Simcha wrote and then continuing to do so to everyone else who supported her and then you have the cheek to turn around and criticise Simcha’s husband for being uncharitable and sarcastic. You are more than happy to rip into everyone else but when any one does it to you-its a very different story. I think you should have a good look in the mirror and see that plank in your own eye.

The experience that Mr Fisher had with TLM people is quite common and I have certainly met people like that as well as some lovely people who are attached to the TLM. It is not only the schismatic TLM people that are anti-semite so are many of the ones who attend TLM approved by the Church. Everything they don’t like is part of a Satanic Jewish Talmudic Kabblaistic plot to Judaise the Church. Is it any wonder that so many get turned off attending the TLM. The problem people may be few and obnoxious but why do the others not challenge them and pull them into line. Or maybe we are just being paranoid Jews after all.

Posted by Simcha's husband on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 7:19 PM (EDT):

When I meet a TLMer who is willing to publically renounce the blatant anti-semitism found among the TLM ranks, and the nasty language they use about the NO, then I will rethink my opinion. I won’t hold my breath.

Posted by Nina on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 6:42 PM (EDT):

I must agree with Maria. The tone of antagonism toward the TLM is an unjustice. I think you are hurting your own defense of ugliness. There may be some ugly people who embrace the TLM, but there are ugly people EVERYWHERE. What Mr. Fisher experienced was not an accurate representation of the true traditional community and those who love the Church within it. What he attended does not even sound Catholic—-it sounds schismatic. And therefore it is not bearing fruit. Anyone can call themselves “catholic”——look at Frances Kisling and “Catholics for a Free Choice”. There are unfortunate representatives of the Church, in all times and places, who give bad Christian witness, but I think that perhaps those who love and appreciate Tradition and the TLM are starting to become inaccurately stereotyped because of the loud (and obnoxious) few. ?

Posted by maria on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 6:23 PM (EDT):

Harvey, and I’m reminded of Jesus’ words that said “we must be perfect as our heavenly father is perfect” to which the apostles basically said well, then there’s no hope! after Jesus reminds them that by ourselves we can’t but with God all things are possible. The Lord didn’t let us off the hook He just said keep praying and keep trying anyway. And so we Must keep trying to do better which as Simcha has stated, very often here, she agrees with

Posted by Harvey on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 5:49 PM (EDT):

Okay, I’ll admit. I didn’t slog through all 260 comments (!!!), but for all those of you who couldn’t just say, “interesting perspective” but had to scream from the rooftops - WE MUST DEMAND BEAUTIFUL LITURGY, WE MUST FIGHT FOR IT, WE MUST GIVE OUR LIVES FOR IT, etc. etc. etc. ... I’m simply reminded that not even the most exquisite seamstress could sew a vestment worthy of Our Lord, not even the most crystal clear singer could produce sounds worthy of Our Lord, and not even the most reverent priest could genuflect perfectly to Our Lord. Which is probably why He chose to be born into a stable.

This has probably already been said in the previous 260 comments. Nice article, Simcha. Can’t wait to read more.

Posted by maria on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 5:01 PM (EDT):

Ok now y’all are just getting ugly…stop…what I understand from Simcha’s explanation is..what do you do when confronted with something that you know is either irreverent or just outright wrong DURING the Holy Mass? Do you ..A) stand up and shout Hey! You there stop that! Or B) sit there murmuring and grumbling in your heart thereby offending the Lord further. I have to go with Simcha’s idea of During the Mass OFFER IT UP. May I suggest: Put your kneeler up and kneel on the cold floor (penance), during the Our Father don’t hold hands instead make perfect praying hands,kneel,bow your head low and pray(mortification). In this way offering the Lord your most reverent and perfect worship in reparation for the lack of others. After Mass begin a regular regimen of Fasting, Prayer and Mortification then make an appointment to speak to the Priest. Approach him RESPECTFULLY remembering Whom he represents. Fire off letters to the Archdiocese and anyone else you think might help. Try to engage like minded individuals to affect change. If all this fails then testify with your feet…shake the dust of your sandals and move. Ultimately you are responsible for your soul and the little souls entrusted to you and a steady diet of Irreverence to The Almighty will not strengthen your soul only weaken it. Mr. Fisher sir, I attend a TLM and I assure you that not all are like the one you experienced just as not all NO Masses are ugly

Mr. Simcha, you’re right. Mr. Beck is always interested in anyone with special abilities, particularly if they have insider knowledge on that conspiracy known as the Federal Reserve.

Posted by Michelle on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 2:23 PM (EDT):

Mr. Fisher, while it is a natural inclination to defend one’s wife, I do not believe that sarcasm should be in order when writing your defense.

Tacky, ugly Masses are an affront to what is holy, sacred, majestic and dignified about the Faith. While I do not defend the actions of those who flee to something like the SSPX, their reasoning is to find some means of escape (although not the right one) from the banal, the kitsch and the abuses that occur at these “ugly” liturgies.

What you seem to not realize in your defense is that the Church gives the faithful the right to have a properly celebrated Mass. She also gives the means to remedy the situation. Loving Mamma seems to disregard that. In Pam’s defense of Simcha, she seems to not take that into account. You, too, also seem to extol these “tacky” Masses.

When you start to write for a Catholic publication, you put yourself out there for people to challenge you on what you have written. Simcha says that she did not mean to offer a gameplan. However, to merely write about feelings and offer nothing concrete is not a good thing.

As I said before, Simcha has a right to her opinion, and you, as her husband have the right to defend her. However, to be sarcastic to people in writing your defense is not being charitable.

Posted by Simcha's Husband on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 2:12 PM (EDT):

You’re right Michelle, Simcha obviously meant what she never wrote, and she was always wrong when she said she never wrote what you accused her of writing. Good thing you’re here to find the real meanings behind the false exteriors. Have you contacted anyone about your special abilities? Glenn Beck? Pope Benedict? The Amazing Randi?

I have a confession to make. Many years ago, I did go to an illicit Mass. First, the choir was terrible. I know it’s minor, but they sounded like a competitive cat strangling team.

Next, the priest had no permission from a superior in any order, or the diocese to celebrate this Mass, so it was done on the sly. Sometimes we were at a Protestant wedding chapel, sometimes the gym at a Mormon complex. (I refuse to call what those people have churches.)

Finally, the priest would often preach about the evils of the Holy Father, then Pope John Paul II. That was when I finally realized this was a bad place to be.

Oh, did I fail to mention this was a TLM?

I once went to a picnic for this congregation, and heard all about the evils of the JOOOOOS.

Eventually, these folks split off and formed their own “Church.” I bet their liturgy is still pretty good, though.

I have since repented and am now in communion with The Church, tacky Masses and all.

Posted by Pam on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 2:05 PM (EDT):

Since Simcha’s got a new article out already, I’m going to have to make this my last post, too.

Sometimes, you can’t do anything more than what you’ve done. Sometimes, no matter what you do, you’re still stuck with a less than lovely, perfect liturgy. Sometimes, it’s a one off. Sometimes it isn’t. Sometimes, it’s imperfect, even WITH education.

If you have the time, energy and inclination to make things right, praise God, because not everyone does. If you do not, praise God anyway.

Posted by Michelle on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 1:57 PM (EDT):

Simcha, but the way you wrote it, expressing some misdirected love for the ugly, does leave it open for questions to be raised. Woody had a good point of voting with one’s pocketbook and, in many cases, feet.

A one and done exposure to “ugly” is one thing; repeatedly subjecting yourself to it is quite another. As I wrote earlier, perhaps the efforts would be better made in blogs to reeducate the faithful about beauty in the liturgy.

One can wail and have a pity party and just try to bear it, or, one can actually try and do something about the situation. If that does not work, leave and find a parish that cares about the liturgy.

One can write about feelings, but, if they only offer emotional release without anything concrete, then it really does not help.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 1:34 PM (EDT):

Okay, I’m going to give this one last shot, and then I’m really done. Thank you to everyone who participated in this interesting conversation—and thank you to everyone who left an encouraging word! And yes, my husband is my hero. In fact, I had to beg him not to say more.
//
Michelle and others who object to this article because you say it encourages a dangerous attitude of acceptance, tolerance of something that should not be tolerated: maybe the following question will help you to understand why I wrote this post. So imagine you’re someone who has struggled for years and years to improve the liturgy, and has donated countless hours of time and effort and money—and you go to Mass, and things are still crappy.
//
Or, imagine you come from a parish where things are done in a manner that is beautiful and befitting of a sacrifice with Our Lord. But one week you’re visiting your sick auntie, and your auntie’s church is crappy.
//
You tell me: what would the proper state of mind be, WHILE YOU’RE THERE? What would be the most helpful interior disposition you could assume? Just for that one Sunday, just to get through that one Mass.
//
That’s what I’m talking about—how to get through a Mass that you do not like, but cannot change. For some lucky people, it’s an occasional misfortune; for others, it’s a way of life. I think it’s incredibly offensive to say to those people, “For shame! You are giving the Lord something inferior. Stop being so complacent. You should start thinking more profoundly, like we do—and then you’d be good and angry, like we are.” So fine, we should be good and angry outside Mass, when maybe we can do something about it. But during Mass? Is it appropriate to be angry at each other during Mass? To me, THAT is what speaks of apathy and complacency: being willing to wallow in your disgust and dismay, and not making the interior effort to do your very best to offer something worthwhile up to God.
//
This article was not intended as a game plan for the future of liturgy in America. It was intended as a helpful insight into how to get through one hour of Mass. Take it or leave it!

Posted by Michelle on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 1:00 PM (EDT):

@Jo, I think that you actually captured what I believe is wrong with Simcha’s aricle. Sin makes us ugly. I think we can all agree on that. However, when we celebrate the liturgy in an ugly manner, we show disrespect to God.

@Woody Jones, you make some very valid points. We pray as we believe. Simply tolerating the ugly does not help anyone. In fact, repeated exposure migh lead to liturgical apathy. You are correct. It’s not that those of us who vehemently object to Simcha’s piece are being “more Catholic” than the Pope; it’s that we see a much deeper issue.

Posted by Woody Jones on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 12:32 PM (EDT):

I can appreciate Simcha’s point here, and am no Latin Mass maven, but I would just add that not everyone can take the ugly liturgies without serious damage being done to their Faith, I know this was true for me, for the reasons stated below. Therefore, one should, I think, approach this kind of thing with caution and be mindful of any indications of serious trouble that may arise.

In a more general way, I would suggest that the real problem with these ugly liturgies is the symbolism they convey: not really worshipping God but worshipping human beings and their creativity; thus the church in the round: instead of facing the Lord, we all face each other, implicity saying that we, rather than the Lord, are what is really important there. While in the early ages of the Church, the Church may have baptized the pagan rituals and even buildings, today, the Kumbaya music and liturgy represents the world converting the Church, rather than the Church baptizing Kumbaya. Since the Eucharist is the heart of the common life of Catholics, no wonder that with the degradation of the Eucharistic ritual, there has been a degradation (actually: implosion) of faith for Western Catholics (see any survey about beliefs, Mass attendance, etc.).

The real problem I have with the stoic approach suggested by the article is simply that if all of us keep on gritting our teeth and bearing it at these faux liturgies, they will never change. The only way we faithful can influence this is by voting with our feet (and checkbooks). This is not being “more Catholic than the Pope.” Saint Catherine of Sienna could berate a pope, we can at least vote with our feet to protect our own faith and that of our families.

Posted by Mary Beth on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 4:45 AM (EDT):

As I commented way in the beginning, the devil loves nothing more than our own personal ugliness.
Thank you, Simcha. Though none of us are worthy, you are truly beautiful (and so is your family).
And thank you, Simcha Husband, for your gallantry and chivalry. You have warmed this old (40 something) Mamma’s heart.

Posted by KK on Thursday, Feb 24, 2011 2:29 AM (EDT):

Simcha! Thank YOU for your bravery! Most of us DO get it!

Posted by Jo Flemings on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 9:07 PM (EDT):

Simcha, you are SO singing my song in this post.

These base and tacky things we offer Our God are so unfit AND SO AM I!!!! Oh thank you, Lord Jesus, for not recoiling from the Cross and from me in horror and disgust and help me to love like You do!

And thank you, Simcha, for saying it here, like this, now.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 8:09 PM (EDT):

@maria, no problem!!! I have the same problem replying from my blackberry.

Posted by maria on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 8:03 PM (EDT):

Simcha—
hmmm sounds yummy enjoy you have certainly put in a hard days work. you did not sound huffy..i don’t mind at all being corrected it teaches me stuff..i’m new at this got lots to learn. have a good evening God bless you

Posted by maria on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 8:01 PM (EDT):

hmmm sounds yummy enjoy you have certainly put in a hard days work. you did not sound huffy..i don’t mid at all being corrected it teaches me stuff..i’m new at this got lots to learn. have a good evening God bless you

Posted by maria on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:56 PM (EDT):

Michelle, i did not mean to say you had the same song diff verse over and over but that the questions being directed at you were a diff. variation on the same theme. i really have to practice my typing not to mention editing skills..sorry

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:55 PM (EDT):

Michelle - sure. Thanks for being willing to still talk to me. I do apologize for getting snappy. It’s been a long, weird day, and I was taken aback at how big a stir this post caused!

Simcha, if you permit me, I wish to email you the link to my friend’s blog.

Posted by maria on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:50 PM (EDT):

**same song diff verse kind of questions being directed at her over and over** sorry didn’t see that b$ i hit send

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:49 PM (EDT):

@maria: Thank you. It’s funny. I did not quote the same documents, just the same author using different documents.

The other part of the problem as to why “ugly” liturgies exist is that, in many cases, the clergy are lacking liturgical formation. This might be due to the fact that immediately after the Second Vatican Council, there was poor formation of the seminarians up until the mid 1990s.

Redemptionis Sacramentum makes it clear that the experimental phase is over. In fact, it’s been over for the past 35 years (or so). Unfortunately, bad habits and bad liurgy get perpetuated. The “ugly” manages to flourish like weeds.

The documents serve as the weed-killer, so to speak. The Holy See gives the faithful the right to lodge legitimate complaints, first with the pastor, then with the bishop, then with the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. The Holy See also gives the faithful the right to a properly celebrated liturgy that is not merely Valid (which is the most basic requirement), but, is also licit and conforms completely to the standards set forth by the Church.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:49 PM (EDT):

Michelle - well, there you go! Writing about liturgy from time to time really is a good idea. I have refrained from it in the past because every time I had something to say about liturgy, it was whining, complaining, and mocking, and I knew that there was already enough of that—but I will try to be more open to writing about the positive aspects of it. I certainly would like to be part of the solution because, as I said, the whole impetus for this article was because of my frustration and disgust with the state of things as they are.
/
I can’t promise to launch right into a campaign, or anything, because I know perfectly well that I’m no scholar. When I do research on anything, my writing becomes very dry and preachy, and people don’t read it. That is why I stick to ideas that come from personal experience. And you have to admit, people do read that!

Posted by Bridie on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:37 PM (EDT):

@Michelle, again, I think you are missing the point. That’s great that you had the courage and wisdom to go talk to the priest. God bless you for it.
I never said that one shouldn’t do anything to try and right a wrong. However, can we really do anything about it while mass is going on? Instead of leaving in a huff (because we still have to attend mass and there isn’t another one for miles around) or standing in the back with a stoney face(and giving in to the near occaion of sin of anger), what if we were to kneel prayerfully and not participate in the abuse? Wouldn’t that be a statement to those around that we are not condoning what is giong on? Then after mass, when there is time and opportunity and we are not adding to the distraction to, like I said, go talk to father or maybe God’s grace will touch someone and they will start a conversation and ask questions.
Just to reiterate, I was talking about our attitude in the midst of mass.
Anyway, I’ve got to go. Hope this made sense.

Posted by maria on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:37 PM (EDT):

Simcha, first—I hope you enjoy your supper and second—I did not mean to accuse you of saying those things. My intention was to point out that they were said. And I agree that blocking her would have been extreme intolerance but telling her to stop well…she was answering with the same answer because it was the same song diff. verse over and over. I’m new to this whole blogging thing so if I sounded accusatory I’m sorry

Posted by Katharine on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:36 PM (EDT):

A mass that is valid and licit but lacking in aesthetic appeal needs to be examined within the the context of your spiritual life. If you, ideally with the the guidance of a good spiritual director, believe that attending a mass that is aesthetically lacking is one of the more serious occasions of sin/sins of omission that you are facing in life (I expect that you would have to be rather holy for this to be the case) then it behooves you to take decisive action to make changes in your parish, find a new mass, etc. even if it means spending significant time and effort doing so.

On the other hand, if you still struggle with a long list of more personal sins then I believe most spiritual directors would ask that you give what is lacking within yourself priority. If you can still take action to rectify the unpleasant church situation without giving in to the sin of pride or neglecting the important task of rectifying yourself then go for it.

Unfortunately my experience of those who vociferously denounce perfectly valid masses and publicly chastise their fellow Catholics is that they have their priorities confused.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:34 PM (EDT):

@Simcha, actually, you can do something. You could serve as a catalyst by providing some sort of liturgical catechesis through your blog. As much as I love Fr. Z and the New Liturgical Movement, they do not have to be the only source of liturgical catechesis.

A lot of folks may have a gut feeling that something is amiss at these “ugly” liturgies, although they may not be able to name the problem. Informing them using plain-folks language about proper liturgy is one way of doing it.

You don’t have to make your whole blog about litury; however, once in a while, it would not hurt to throw in some Liturgy 101 as a sort of educational piece. For all you know, this blog might be the only exposure some folks will ever have to learning about the liturgy.

I have a friend of mine who has a blog. This person began the blog because her diocese was not offering any liturgical formation. What she thought was a local thing wound up attracting a wider audience, with people checking in from as far away as Malaysia and Iran.

Like I said, you don’t have to make it 100% liturgy, but, by writing about this topic and teaching people what the documents say, you could actually contribute to being a part of the solution.

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:28 PM (EDT):

::sigh:: My four year old is now hitting people over the head with MY e-book. I think perhaps I’ve been too worried about whether or not people get the point or not.

Simcha, my hat’s off to you. :) I trust the Register will appreciate the massive increase in traffic to their website, and will understand that your article was not meant to be a theological treatise.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:24 PM (EDT):

“You offer no real concrete solutions other than grinning and bearing things. What have you done about these matters? I think it is only fair to ask you this question since you asked this of me.”
/
As I mentioned a bazillion comments ago, I freely admit that I have not done a damn thing. As I stated, I do not have the time or energy. There are many, many people just like me, who see bad stuff going down, and we just cannot do anything about it at the moment. This article was aimed at people like me, who cannot do anything to improve the situation. If my point were “grin and bear it,” I would have used those four words, and not the 750+ which I did use.
/
I did thank you for your work on behalf of the liturgy, and state that I am grateful for people like you. I did not say, because I do not believe, that nothing should be done.
/
I really do have to go make supper now.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:16 PM (EDT):

Maria, I didn’t use the phrase “beating over the head,” (that was another commenter) and I didn’t say that she called anyone names (that was another commenter). She seems very anxious that people do not understand what she is saying, so I wanted to reassure her that we do, indeed hear her.

Intolerant behavior would be blocking her, which I have chosen not to do. Unprofessional behavior would be calling her names, which I have not done.

After the umpteenth reiteration of “Why don’t you read the documents?” I thought someone ought to let her know that we heard what she said. She can keep on saying it, for all I care, but it would be more interesting if she had something NEW to say. I have to go make dinner now.

Posted by Margaret Farr on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:15 PM (EDT):

I wish I’d paid closer attention in my college aesthetics class. I seem to remember that there are objective criteria for defining beauty, but that each brings his own judgment, experience, education etc. to bear. Hopefully, all here can acknowledge that this is a culture that is dumbing itself down, and that what we and our children—and the artists themselves—bring to bear is ever shrinking. Through most of our cultural history it was thought that soul and mind are lifted by what is excellent. “Taste and See” is banal and insipid. In our family we call it the “Pizza Hut Song”. People like it. So be it. I merely thank Simcha (again) for putting a few tools in this wayfarer’s toolbox, as I try to stay on the path my beloved Church has laid out.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:12 PM (EDT):

Simcha, you seem to not understand what I am trying to say. Granted, this is your blog and you have the right to say whatever you want to say. However, I do find a lot of flaws in what you have written. You offer no real concrete solutions other than grinning and bearing things. What have you done about these matters? I think it is only fair to ask you this question since you asked this of me.

Maybe I am one of the few who sees that the emperor’s new clothes are not exactly new or are even clothes.

To those, including Simcha, who are critical of me for citing the documents, you seemed to have made my point about the need for liturgical catechesis. National Catholic Register could devote some time to catechizing its readers on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Even a grass roots effort is better than no effort at all.

We are in anticipation of the Revised Roman Missal. Pope Benedict XVI hopes that this time of preparation could also be used as a liturgical catechesis. It seems to me, that having read a lot of the posts here, including those from the blogger in question, that this approach is sorely needed.

Posted by maria on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:10 PM (EDT):

Simcha, I don’t think Michele is beating any one with her judgments or opinion. She is merely answering posts that are specifically directed at her and doing so by restating established Church teaching. If anyone has a problem with what she is saying then march yourself right up to the Vatican. I have also not seen where she has called anyone any names though the reverse has not been true. Asking her to stop posting is intolerant and unprofessional

Posted by Sam Schmitt on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:05 PM (EDT):

It goes without saying that, faced with ugliness in the liturgy, we should react not with anger, bitterness, and lack of charity, but humility. This goes for every less-than-perfect thing in our lives, which is pretty much everything. If this is the only point of the original article, there’s not much to argue about (except if you’re Canisius.)

I can’t really disagree with this as far as it goes. The problem I have is with what this implies - that ugliness / beauty is not all that important (“The outward decor or singing is nice when it is beautiful but not the most important thing”) objecting to substandard and ugly liturgies is a matter of pride and arrogance (), or it’s all just a matter of taste and anyway (“Bad taste doesn’t “offend” God”, “The “ugliness” of the mass is in the eyes of the Beholder”), or even that we shouldn’t make any judgment at all about the liturgies we attend (“you don’t have any right to judge what is “ugly” and what is not in respect to that parish”).

Even though no arguments are offered for the above positions, those who are offering arguments - who cite objective criteria or Church documentation as a corrective to the ugliness or who see a bigger issue here than just preferences and taste, are pushed away as “unpleasant.” Wouldn’t it be nicer if we all didn’t make a fuss and suffer through ugly liturgies in silence? It would benefit our humility after all. I grant it would be easier - but would it be the right thing?

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:03 PM (EDT):

@Jean, please know that in instances like what you have described, you do have recourse to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. You can send a letter to the CDWDS and inform them about what happened. Be straight forward. They do care.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:01 PM (EDT):

@Bridie: That is why such liturgies should be avoided, if at all possible. It just seems to me that taking the paficist approach is not necessarily the best.

It is very hard to walk into a Mass where the celebrant makes up his own collect and then gets the faithful to recite it after him. Furthermore, he does the same thing with the Offertory. Then he decides to make edits to the preface and to the Eucharistic Prayer. All the while, bad music permeates througout the sanctuary. Yes, I was there. It was the last Mass of the day. Afterwards, I spoke to him and charitably told him that the GIRM does not allow this. I could get by with a 45-minute homily, but, not with the rest of what transpired.

Needless to say, I scratched that parish off my list. Sometime later, I spoke to our bishop about it. I don’t think the situation has repeated itself, as far as I know. A visiting priest preaching a mission sold handerchiefs outside the church. These were to be used to touch the luna of the monstrance while the Blessed Sacrament was in procession. This is wrong on so many levels. Would Simcha’s response be to let this slide? Would Kahili think this was acceptable?

Posted by Kahili on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:57 PM (EDT):

Michelle, as you yourself acknowledged, there’s a time for flipping tables. I respect your right to disagree with me and believe it or not, I have been reading your posts attentively. I know I don’t know everything. What I don’t respect is you insisting on seeing things in Simcha’s post that aren’t there - and then insulting people by presuming sin on their part in the course of their Christian duties. It’s destructive, and it’s…ugly. You got your wish. People aren’t sitting around tolerating the ugly. They are doing something about it.

Posted by Jean Emerson on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:56 PM (EDT):

All those people who think we should endure the ‘ugly’ Masses as a penance should try it! I endured them as long as I should. I wept at Confession about my judgemental attitude and struggled to be faithful to what I believed but…well perhaps I am weak…in fact I know I am, and I prayed for strength, but I felt in the end that going to Mass was becoming a serious source of sin for me. I never felt peace, despite all my prayers and good intentions. I felt our beloved Lord was being grossly insulted not only t Mass but hourly, in that church. AS for complaining to the Bishop, he was the leader of it all. He preached the same faith-destroying homilies as the priests, and it was he who told us we must not genuflect to the blessed sacrament but bow to the altar.

@Michelle - I agree that staying silent when something is wrong is not the thing to do, which is why I have continued this discussion w/someone who obviously does not care about people, but rather, being ‘right’. I have to go live life for real right now, but I do hope that you will consider the fact that extremism is never the way to go. Take a look at where it has brought human beings throughout history. I hope you start to see all the people through those many, many words of yours. God bless you.

Posted by Bridie on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:50 PM (EDT):

@Kahili: Thank you. :)
@Michelle: I think you are reading a bit into my post. Where did I trivialize illicit practices? I do agree with you. Illicit practices are very wrong and do render alot of confusion. My point was, when having to attend a Mass that does contain some abuses or mistakes or cheasiness (I’m not talking dancing on the altar or changing the words or matter of consecration) do we get anything out of it by sitting there and becoming so enraged that we would probably have been better off not coming? Or could we remember our own faults and failings and realize that they offend our Lord just as much (every sin offends Him infinitely, even venial) and ask for grace for ourselves and those around us? Wouldn’t the latter be “protecting the integrity and dignity fo the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass” even if we are all alone in doing it?

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:47 PM (EDT):

Michelle: You want people to read church documents. You want people to understand that ugliness, even when it doesn’t make the Mass illicit or invalid, is still extremely serious and dangerous. We have all heard you. Can you stop now?

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:44 PM (EDT):

Kahili, there is no need for insulting me. As I said, the ones who seem to advocate love and tolerance are showing very little towards those who disagree with them.

The attitude that Bridie seems to take mirrors that of Simcha’s: do nothing and tolerate the ugly. The problem is this: if you know that something is wrong and you remain silent, then, that is just as bad. That is called “omission”.

Insulting people adds little credibility to your argument. It certainly did not add anything to Canisius’.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:40 PM (EDT):

Bridie, it’s also not about being “holier than thou”. It seems to me that a more liberal slant has permeated NCRegister. That is sad.

Validity is important; however, licitness is also important. You seem to trivialize ilicit practices and not think that they are bad. They are. They render a lot of confusion into the Mass. That is one of the points that I don’t think Simcha got when she wrote about “ugly” liturgies.

Posted by Kahili on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:40 PM (EDT):

@Bridie, well said.

@Michelle, now you’re accusing Bridie of sins of omission while crying that no one is niiiiice to you? Are you for real? Also, how do you type in a straight jacket?

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:32 PM (EDT):

@Bridie, you seem to make light of bad liturgies. Bear in mind that sins of omission are just as bad. You may not think that bad liturgies are serious business, but, they are.

It is also not about pride. It is about protecting the integrity and the dignity of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, something that Simcha and her supporters seem to be missing.

Posted by Bridie on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:32 PM (EDT):

Do you really think that God is pleased with all the name calling and verbal bashing going on? Simcha was in no way advocating for liturgical abuse. Haven’t any of you had to go to a mass that did not meet your standards of worthiness, holiness, etc? I know I have. What is our tendency in that circumstance? It’s to look down on those people, thinking, “Well, your music is disgusting” and “I’m glad I’m not so disrespectful.” And we spend the whole mass giggling, snickering, or being horrified. We forget, that, as long as the words of Consecration are said correctly and the matter is correct, Jesus, our God, is truly present on that altar. Are we any better for our “holier than thou” attitude than those very people we’ve been criticizing. What if instead, we made a profound act of Contrition and asked God to humble our pride and then to also bless these others so that we can all truly know, love, and honor Him in the way He prefers. Then, perhaps, if the Holy Ghost is guiding you, go back to talk to Father after mass and quietly and charitably find a way to point out something that may have been abusive.
Just keep in mind, at the Last Judgement, Christ isn’t going to ask what Mass you went to, or what song you sang, but how you lived out your Catholic life.
That’s just my two cents. Sorry if it offends anyone. And, Simcha, if I misrepresented you in anyway or if I was disrespectful, let me know and I will correct it.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:30 PM (EDT):

@Lovimgmama, it’s not a misuse of the documents that both Popes have written. It’s your choice to agree or disagree with them. However, I offer this as a means to educate the folks who have posted comments on this blog as well as those who are reading.

It seems to me that everyone will rise to Simcha’s defense, but, when someone quotes actual documents to support one’s opinion, that individual is castigated by the same people who advocate love and tolerance.

It’s no wonder that NCRegister is turning into the NCR.

Posted by Bridie on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:28 PM (EDT):

Oh my goodness! I can’t help but almost laughing (if it weren’t so amazingly sad) at all the brew-ha-ha Simcha’s post stirred up.
Do you really think that God is pleased with all the name calling and verbal bashing going on? Simcha was in no way advocating for liturgical abuse. Haven’t any of you had to go to a mass that did not meet your standards of worthiness, holiness, etc? I know I have. What is our tendency in that circumstance? It’s to look down on those people, thinking, “Well, your music is disgusting” and “I’m glad I’m not so disrespectful.” And we spend the whole mass giggling, snickering, or being horrified. We forget, that, as long as the words of Consecration are said correctly and the matter is correct, Jesus, our God, is truly present on that altar. Are we any better for our “holier than thou” attitude than those very people we’ve been criticizing. What if instead, we made a profound act of Contrition and asked God to humble our pride and then to also bless these others so that we can all truly know, love, and honor Him in the way He prefers. Then, perhaps, if the Holy Ghost is guiding you, go back to talk to Father after mass and quietly and charitably find a way to point out something that may have been abusive.
Just keep in mind, at the Last Judgement, Christ isn’t going to ask what Mass you went to, or what song you sang, but how you lived out your Catholic life.
That’s just my two cents. Sorry if it offends anyone. And, Simcha, if I misrepresented you in anyway or if I was disrespectful, let me know and I will correct it.

Posted by Loving mama on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:23 PM (EDT):

@Michelle - let me put it this way..if my experience as a musician was good enough for Pope John Paul II, it should certainly be good enough for you. Seriously, you need to give it a rest sister. I am sure Pope Benedict would not appreciate your misuse of his rhetoric.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:15 PM (EDT):

Kahili, this is not about beating people over the head with the documents; however, this blog has shown me that there is a sore lack of liturgical catechesis out there. Furthermore, what is wrong with showing people the citations and giving them the information?

As for those who say that the documents do not prove my point, maybe they have been to too many “ugly” liturgies with substandard music to know the difference between what is sacred and what is banal. Before my detractors start shooting arrows at me because of my usage of the word “banal”, perhaps they would do well to read the Spirit of the Liturgy. The Holy Father uses that word here:

“On the one hand, there is pop music, which is certainly no longer supported by the people in the ancient sense (populus). It is aimed at the phenomenon of the masses, is industrially produced, and ultimately has to be described as a cult of the banal. “Rock”, on the other hand, is the expression of elemental passions, and at rock festivals it assumes a cultic character, a form of worship, in fact, in opposition to Christian worship. People are, so to speak, released from themselves by the emotional shock of rhythm, noise, and special lighting effects. However, in the ecstasy of having all their defenses torn down, the participants sink, as it were, beneath the elemental force of the universe. The music of the Holy Spirit’s sober inebriation seems to have little chance when self has become a prison, the mind is a shackle, and breaking out from both appears as a true promise of redemption that can be tasted at least for a few moments.”

“Blest be the Lord” sounds very much like the pop music that was popular at the time it was written.

Posted by Loving mama on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:08 PM (EDT):

@Michelle - this does not support what you said at all actually. I am not going to brag about the liturgical musicians I am connected too and my background as a musician to prove you wrong even though I could very easily, but you are just out right up on a high horse here and wrong. Are you actually trying to build church?

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:07 PM (EDT):

Simcha, what I am saying is this. As a blogger, you leave yourself open to commentary about what you write. LMS, the blogger who wrote a rebuttal to your column, made some very valid points.

It seems to me that great care should be taken by anyone who writes something and posts it out for everyone to see should do their homework.

It is also ironic that the very people who are advocating love and tolerance are actually practicing the opposite.

Posted by Kahili on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:06 PM (EDT):

@Michelle, is this how you’ve tried to change the liturgy in your diocese? Strangling people to death with quotes from church documents and telling them they’re wrong, misguided and “substandard” if they don’t listen to you? By all means, refer to the documents, inform people on the norms (I’m not disagreeing that we need more awareness of them). But isn’t there a way to do this that doesn’t belittle people? Has this approach actually worked?

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:02 PM (EDT):

“”@Athol, you may not like the singing by the Sistene Chapel choir, but, it actually does sound beautiful. Furthermore, they are singing what the Church has as its first order of music: the antiphons.”“

And we come full circle. @Athol, stick it out with the Sistine Chapel Choir. I know it sounds ugly to you, but Christ is there, too.

:)

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:00 PM (EDT):

@Pam, I never said that the Mass in the Ordinary Form was ilicit. Furthermore, even Pope John Paul II had a few things to say about substandard music:

4. In continuity with the teachings of St Pius X and the Second Vatican Council, it is necessary first of all to emphasize that music destined for sacred rites must have holiness as its reference point: indeed, “sacred music increases in holiness to the degree that it is intimately linked with liturgical action”[11]. For this very reason, “not all without distinction that is outside the temple (profanum) is fit to cross its threshold”, my venerable Predecessor Paul VI wisely said, commenting on a Decree of the Council of Trent[12]. And he explained that “if music - instrumental and vocal - does not possess at the same time the sense of prayer, dignity and beauty, it precludes the entry into the sphere of the sacred and the religious”[13]. Today, moreover, the meaning of the category “sacred music” has been broadened to include repertoires that cannot be part of the celebration without violating the spirit and norms of the Liturgy itself.

St Pius X’s reform aimed specifically at purifying Church music from the contamination of profane theatrical music that in many countries had polluted the repertoire and musical praxis of the Liturgy. In our day too, careful thought, as I emphasized in the Encyclical Ecclesia de Eucharistia, should be given to the fact that not all the expressions of figurative art or of music are able “to express adequately the mystery grasped in the fullness of the Church’s faith”[14]. Consequently, not all forms of music can be considered suitable for liturgical celebrations.

5. Another principle, affirmed by St Pius X in the Motu Proprio Tra le Sollecitudini and which is closely connected with the previous one, is that of sound form. There can be no music composed for the celebration of sacred rites which is not first of all “true art” or which does not have that efficacy “which the Church aims at obtaining in admitting into her Liturgy the art of musical sounds”[15].

This comes from his Chirograph on Sacred Music.

Posted by Athol on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:59 PM (EDT):

Michelle why don’t you give it a rest- no use flogging a dead horse. We know what you think-we disagree with you and find the way you express yourself very unpleasant- I don’t know if you mean to come across that way -but you do.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:54 PM (EDT):

Here is what Pope Benedict said about art in Sacramentum Caritatis. Perhaps Athol and the others might want to read this before they start leveling insults:

Art at the service of the liturgy

41. The profound connection between beauty and the liturgy should make us attentive to every work of art placed at the service of the celebration. (122) Certainly an important element of sacred art is church architecture, (123) which should highlight the unity of the furnishings of the sanctuary, such as the altar, the crucifix, the tabernacle, the ambo and the celebrant’s chair. Here it is important to remember that the purpose of sacred architecture is to offer the Church a fitting space for the celebration of the mysteries of faith, especially the Eucharist. (124) The very nature of a Christian church is defined by the liturgy, which is an assembly of the faithful (ecclesia) who are the living stones of the Church (cf. 1 Pet 2:5).

This same principle holds true for sacred art in general, especially painting and sculpture, where religious iconography should be directed to sacramental mystagogy. A solid knowledge of the history of sacred art can be advantageous for those responsible for commissioning artists and architects to create works of art for the liturgy. Consequently it is essential that the education of seminarians and priests include the study of art history, with special reference to sacred buildings and the corresponding liturgical norms. Everything related to the Eucharist should be marked by beauty. Special respect and care must also be given to the vestments, the furnishings and the sacred vessels, so that by their harmonious and orderly arrangement they will foster awe for the mystery of God, manifest the unity of the faith and strengthen devotion (125).

Simcha’s blog post could have served as a viable teaching moment had she taken on a different approach.

@Athol, you may not like the singing by the Sistene Chapel choir, but, it actually does sound beautiful. Furthermore, they are singing what the Church has as its first order of music: the antiphons.

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:54 PM (EDT):

So it’s Dan Schutte’s fault that he wasn’t born a few centuries ago? Do you not suppose that “All Glory Laud and Honor” also suffered from sounding like 1620’s dreck?
Having read the paragraph in RS, yes, I agree. Nevertheless, you are still denying the reality that music that is not to your liking can still be reverent, can still respect the meaning of the liturgy. I know this because not all music that you would consider appropriate is liked by all people.
You do realize, don’t you, that someone might very well describe as “ugly” a liturgy that you find sublime and glorious, don’t you? Nevertheless, it would behoove that person to sit through it, participate as well as they can, and be grateful that Jesus is nevertheless there, right?

As to Vatican documents:
First, the establishing of the Novus Ordo as a valid and licit liturgy (something some, but not you, Michelle, don’t seem to get):
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6missal.htm

From JPII, a lot of stuff, very general, and very interesting, re. the Church in America:
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_22011999_ecclesia-in-america_en.html

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:53 PM (EDT):

Michelle, I have Redemptionis Sacramentum open on my desktop right now. If I read it and promise to retract any false statements I made in my post, will you give it a rest?

Posted by Athol on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:53 PM (EDT):

Just for the benefit of Canisius and other anti-semites- I’m a Jew too and one of the reasons I stopped going regularly to the Tridentine Latin Mass (when I was a new Catholic) was the number of people who were anti-semitic and saw everything as a Jewish conspiracy.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:51 PM (EDT):

What I am trying to do here is to challenge all of you, Simcha included, to read the documents of the Holy See. Read The Spirit of the Liturgy. After you’ve read them, then make an informed opinion.

Those who write blogs do have some sort of responsibility here. Even though they are writing editorials that express how they feel, those who write expressing Catholic matters should perhaps take the time to read up on what the Church says, what the Holy Father says. Then, after that, they can make an informed decision and write a credible article.

This is where I believe Simcha has failed. One of the comments on this blog indicated that Simcha placed greater importance on receiving Holy Communion, but, the Mass is not soley about that. It is about witnessing God dying and rising in front of us. The music and the environment need to compliment that incredible mystery, not detract from it.

Posted by Nina on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:47 PM (EDT):

I must have cross-posted with Simcha——oops——she already ask that we not engage him. ;) Thanks!

Posted by Athol on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:47 PM (EDT):

Yes I agree. Most of us did get what you meant Simcha. These others are the sort that are more Catholic than the Pope. and I’d hate to meet them as they sound so nasty whereas Simcha and her husband sound like fun and interesting people that would be great at a dinner or cocktail party.

Nobody mentioned the ugly singing at most of the Papal masses we see on TV. I’m sure they do their best but to me when Italians and other ethnic groups sing anything they seem to drag the words out which sounds hideous to me but maybe to them it sounds beautiful. And there is nothing more ugly to me than a Latin benediction sung by Thai peasants- the Latin is totally destroyed for me- I’d prefer they sang it in their own language. And for that matter hearing a group of old out of tune Australian ladies sing the Latin is pretty ugly too- the Australian accent and Latin aren’t a happy combination. But I just say to myself the Bible says"make a joyful noise” and try to focus on the inner mystery rather than lose focus by worrying about how ugly it all sounds to me. I find the Latin Mass whether EF or OF to be pretty military and solemn- I prefer the warmth and lightness of some of the Eastern rites- but hey thats me-others see it differently.

Posted by Mouse on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:46 PM (EDT):

@ Simcha,is someone anti-semitic if they really just hate everybody?

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:45 PM (EDT):

@Kahili and Mouse, do you then not take any stock in what the Holy See to say before forming an opinion? Simply going on feelings without checking how the Church sees things is not necessarily good. Maybe Simcha should have also done the same.

Posted by Nina on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:43 PM (EDT):

In all charity, “Canisius” is either a troll, or struggling himself (probably with mental illness). It is better to ignore. I sincerely hope that Simcha will consider deleting his or her posts as I think it unfairly skews (and skewers!) the conversation.

Posted by maria on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:42 PM (EDT):

+JMJ+
Michelle thank you, your posts remind me of why I travel to a different state, to a tiny little Church, for the Extraordinary Form. The Lord has used the quite reverence of the people there and their love of learning The Faith to instill the love of those things in me.I feel unutterably blessed when they answer my questions with patience and then loan me books and cd’s, give me their emails and phone numbers to answer any questions I might have. They have made us feel most welcome. The quite reverence is a balm to my soul that is bombarded daily by noise. While the point of Simcha’s article is debatable the question of what to do when confronted with irreverence to the Lord is not. Jesus Himself told us what to do….Mark 6:7-13 Jesus summoned the Twelve and began to send them out two by two… He said to them,” Wherever you enter a house, stay there until you leave. Whatever place does not welcome you or listen to you, leave there and shake the dust off your feet in testimony against them.” So they went off and preached repentance. Saint Athanasius the Great took on Bishops and Cardinals of his day against the heresy of Arianism boldly proclaiming “were I to wake up tomorrow and find the entire world in Arian belief it would be Athanasius against the world!” The name of the fight may change but the instructions are still clear and the stakes are just as high. The Mass is NOT ours to change but it IS ours to fight for. Approach your Pastors respectfully, respectfully in all ways respectfully remembering Whom they represent. If they do not listen shake the dust off your feet and go find a house where the Lord is first in all ways. Meaning where the Tabernacle is in prominence because you can’t say He is the center of your Mass if you have put Him in the corner. Where the Priest catechizes from the pulpit and teaches the Faith in strict accordance with Holy Mother Church. He will not limit his homilies to current events or quote Charlie Brown instead of Saint Augustine. He will challenge people who show up to Mass half naked, talk during Mass etc. He will feed instruct and chastise the sheep as needed and not count the cost to himself. Ladies and gentleman does anyone really think that the Lord is requiring any less of us than He did of the first Christians, Martyrs and Saints who practiced the Extraordinary Form for over 1,500 years? Are you well acquainted with the Lord? Who He says He is? He has revealed Himself in Scripture, the Doctors of the Church, the Saints. Do you have only a passing Sunday acquaintance with Our Lord? Are you leaving the salvation of your soul up to your Pastor? If you are then you are sadly misinformed. The job of saving your soul and those little souls entrusted to your care is yours. I suspect the Lord will no more allow us the out of my “Pastor made me do it” anymore then he allowed Adam the out of “Eve made me do it” or Eve the out of “hey the serpent said”. I get the distinct impression our Lord doesn’t go in for passing the buck. Join the fray fellow Catholics as Saint Paul says fight the good fight, run the race till the end…never say I’ve done all I can do.The Lord rewards richly fellow Catholics and Oh! How I can testify to that! There is not a single one of life’s questions that can not be amply answered by the treasure trove of writings contained in the Catholic Faith. Read up arm yourselves for battle and get in the fight go out swinging.
ALL FOR JESUS! ALL FOR MARY!

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:42 PM (EDT):

Folks, the highly attractive Canisius has now begun sending me private emails accusing me of being . . .Jewish. Quite a shocker, eh? I never would have pegged him as an anti-semite, but you never know. Anyway, can we all please just not engage him anymore?

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:41 PM (EDT):

@Pam: Perhaps you might want to read this before you make allegations:

Liturgical song

42. In the ars celebrandi, liturgical song has a pre-eminent place. (126) Saint Augustine rightly says in a famous sermon that “the new man sings a new song. Singing is an expression of joy and, if we consider the matter, an expression of love” (127). The People of God assembled for the liturgy sings the praises of God. In the course of her two-thousand-year history, the Church has created, and still creates, music and songs which represent a rich patrimony of faith and love. This heritage must not be lost. Certainly as far as the liturgy is concerned, we cannot say that one song is as good as another. Generic improvisation or the introduction of musical genres which fail to respect the meaning of the liturgy should be avoided. As an element of the liturgy, song should be well integrated into the overall celebration (128). Consequently everything—texts, music, execution—ought to correspond to the meaning of the mystery being celebrated, the structure of the rite and the liturgical seasons (129). Finally, while respecting various styles and different and highly praiseworthy traditions, I desire, in accordance with the request advanced by the Synod Fathers, that Gregorian chant be suitably esteemed and employed (130) as the chant proper to the Roman liturgy (131).

I base my opinions after reading the documents of the Church. This is taken from Sacramentum Caritatis. Maybe you would do well to do the same.

Posted by Loving mama on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:35 PM (EDT):

@Michelle- I am a professional musician. What you are saying about “Bless be the Lord” being ‘substandard’ is a load of crap. I have to go take care of my children now. God bless you Michelle and try to lighten up a little will you?

Posted by Mouse on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:35 PM (EDT):

@ Kahili, wasn’t there some document somewhere about someone who said something like “faith hope and love and the greatest of these is love” and something like “love your neighbor as yourself”? I would try to find quotes, but those sounds too much like “feelings” for this discussion, right? ;-)

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:34 PM (EDT):

@loving mama at least I have a job

Posted by Kahili on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:31 PM (EDT):

“It amazes me that those who vociferously defend Simcha have yet to quote any Church documents supporting her “feelings” on the matter.”—-You know this is a blog, not a Vatican council, right?

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:29 PM (EDT):

@Lovingmamma, I do not think that I am hurting. It is sad that for many people, hurting someone’s feelings is seen as the greatest fault. It seems to me that we have all been “Oprah-fied”, including Simcha. She explained that she wrote about her “feelings”, but, she did not really offer any substance.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:25 PM (EDT):

@Pam: Musically-speaking, “Bless be the Lord” is substandard. It sounds too much like the 1970s pop. It is also not really sacred music. On the other hand, “All Glory, Laud and Honor” has centuries of use behind it and is the song par excellence for the Palm Sunday liturgy. Again, you seem to be straining at gnats, here. Look at the two songs in light of No. 42 in Sacramentum Caritatis.

It amazes me that those who vociferously defend Simcha have yet to quote any Church documents supporting her “feelings” on the matter.

@Lovingmamma, perhaps the choir director would welcome your assistance. I would urge you to read Redemptionis Sacramentum. It might help you to understand the perspective of those of us who disagree with Simcha.

Posted by Loving mama on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:25 PM (EDT):

Canisius..you totally have blown your cover. Why are you wasting your time messing around with Catholic’s heads? Go back to work..your boss is looking over your shoulder right now. :o

Posted by Loving mama on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:23 PM (EDT):

@Michelle - There is a very fine Director of Music doing his best to make them sound ‘perfect’but, oops..ends up they’re just human. Speaking of lumping together, I would hardly compare my place in correcting cantors to that of the pope teaching his flock.

As a matter-of-fact, it is completely about being snobby actually. You have to think about what is influencing your actions. Are you correcting for God’s sake, or for your own self-righteous reasons? You may think you are doing it for God, but unfortunately you are hurting more than you’re helping. Peace.

Posted by Mouse on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:22 PM (EDT):

@ Simcha’s husband… the fact that you read your wife’s blog, reply in the comments and come to her defense is awesome. Just awesome. In case you didn’t know.

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:20 PM (EDT):

@ loving Mama I have no use for peace,,, I much rather have anger,,, it frightens liberals

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:19 PM (EDT):

@Michelle, no I am not picking at gnats. Why is “Blest be the Lord,” substandard, but “All Glory Laud and Honor,” isn’t? After all, it appears the composer of the latter was a Lutheran pastor, whereas the composer of the former is a Jesuit priest. Who decides what is substandard, and what is worthy? What makes one “genuine sacred music” and the other, not? It can’t be the lyrics, since the lyrics from Schutte’s piece is straight out of the bible. So it must be the style. Is it too fast? If so, then why is “Jesus Christ is Risen Today” presumably acceptable? Is it because one is usually played on guitar, while the other on organ? What if “Blest be the Lord” is played on organ - is it okay then? If “All Glory Laud and Honor” is played on guitar, is it then suddenly no longer genuine Sacred Music?

Please understand: I’m aware of stylistic differences. I’m aware of the ability of some church musicians to turn the music of the angels into a nightclub performance. I in no way think that’s a good idea, nor do I think that’s an example of an UGLY liturgy, but of a WRONG liturgy. I think that some of the divisions are made because of a difference in taste, and nothing more.

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:19 PM (EDT):

Simcha husband you keep the VII stereotype alive and well, mindless , brainless, destroy everything facet of tradition in the name of tolerance…I am I an angry Trad ,... you bet I am proud of it too.. I will take on any mealy mouthed V2 anyday of the week

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:18 PM (EDT):

Michelle, I intend to start telling fart jokes. In the vernacular!

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:14 PM (EDT):

@Wsquared, I believe that the term is “mutual enrichment” between the OF and the EF.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:12 PM (EDT):

@Lovingmama, maybe helping the cantors may not necessarily be a bad idea. If that will help to improve the quality of the singing, then, that is a good thing. It is about helping. I am sure that your parish might actually appreciate it.

This is also not about being “snobby”. I would suggest that you pick up a copy of the Spirit of the Liturgy, or, will you also accuse Pope Benedict XVI of being “snobby”. Also, please differentiate as to who said what and do not lump both of us together.

I expected a lot of great things from the NCRegister, but, having read Simcha’s blog, I wonder what direction this publication is heading. I also wonder if NCRegister vets all of its bloggers. What qualifies one to write a blog for this publication?

Posted by Simcha's husband on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:11 PM (EDT):

Hey Steve, I mean, Canisius, I’m just glad to see the Trad stereotype alive and well.

Posted by Wsquared on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:10 PM (EDT):

Ms. Fischer, while I enjoyed your piece, and I do agree that “Christ is present,” I have to point out in general that I don’t see why we can’t appreciate *both* the Tridentine and the vernacular Novus Ordo.

The Holy Father has hardly said that the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum in any way rolls back the Novus Ordo, only that priests now don’t need permission from their bishops to celebrate the Tridentine. Furthermore, Pope Benedict has said that either one is fine, and that if the Novus Ordo is your thing, then “by all means.” The reason for the motu proprio was so that we Catholics could better learn to appreciate the Mass and the liturgy—by allowing the Tridentine to inform and help us better appreciate the Novus Ordo. The Tridentine does have some aspects that I think are worth considering: both the Mass and the priest are clearly about Christ (the Mass is not about the priest; so what if he’s “not a great speaker”?), and everyone, including the priest, prays East. It should therefore behoove us to think about who and what a priest is (here, I find it thought-provoking that when he was being ordained, our current Pope realized about his being a priest that “it’s not about you, Joseph”). As such, no: the “Novus Ordo” is not “for retards.” But the Tridentine does have something to teach us.

It’s not “either/or,” guys. We Catholics are supposed to like our “both/ands.”

Posted by Loving mama on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:06 PM (EDT):

Too bad for you Canisius…I still love you and you can’t stop that! :p Hope you find some peace soon. @Michelle&Canisius; - too funny! I’m actually laughing at the notion of being a ‘flower child’ and a ‘man-hating lesbian’. It’s actually the most comical thing I’ve heard in awhile! Thanks to you both! Seriously. It’s amazing to me how communication works and how people who probably have similar views on things can actually ‘argue’. I am not at all suggesting we smoke pot together and have free sex..haha! What I do think is that we need not be snobby. I have talents in the musical field and am often times irked by out of tune playing and aesthetic aspects of the mass. However, when I focus on the purity of a human voice singing praise to God, I no longer care what it sounds like. I hardly think God would stick up his nose to an out-of-tune ‘child’ singing his praises. There is a difference between aesthetic aspects of the mass and those essential to maintaining the dignity of our beliefs. The latter being the types of things the priest would be responsible for. If this is the case, they should definitely be brought to the attention of your pastor. On the other hand, I certainly shouldn’t bring my tuner to mass and ‘charitably correct’ the cantor’s singing. I mean seriously. You would not suggest that would you?

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:02 PM (EDT):

@Pam, what are you driving at exactly? Substandard music, like “Blest be the Lord” does not represent the best we have to offer. A choir singing “All Glory Laud and Honor” out of tune is not ugly because at least they are making a valiant effort at singing genuine Sacred Music. You seem to be picking at gnats here.

I like what the LMS blog noted: maybe Simcha should propose some solutions instead of just taking it all in stride.

Posted by Kahili on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:01 PM (EDT):

@Michelle, by the white sepulchers I wasn’t referring to people who love or attend the Tridentine mass, not at all (even I have been known to frequent that mass on occasion) nor was I referring to people who love (rightly) a good liturgy generally. I was talking about people who get so caught up in rules and what’s wrong that they lose all focus on charity and on Christ. And I’m not advocating an “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” approach. I’m just saying that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar. There’s a time for flipping tables and there’s a time to gently prod people in the right direction. My experience is that most people are so poorly catechized that they don’t know what they don’t know. My position is that embarrassing or belittling people into submission, particularly without knowing their circumstances, upbringing, etc., is unhelpful at best.

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:58 PM (EDT):

@ Michelle, you what is also offensive seeing liberals like Simcha sack the Church for the past forty years with their dogma of tolerance and non judgementalism while abuses of all sorts run rampant. .. Meanwhile loyal decent Catholics are kicked to the curb….

Posted by Mouse on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:57 PM (EDT):

Simcha, thank you for your insight. Having read the piece and the comments, I think that you should have made allusion to women wearing pants. Heads would have exploded and the comments would have doubled. ;-)
That being said, I think the majority of your readers “got it.” I know I did. Chesterton said that angels can fly because they take themselves lightly. Your wit, insight and humor are teaching many of us to fly. Well done.

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:55 PM (EDT):

@Michelle, I’m really still quite confused. Is a mass which includes the use of the song (from “Glory & Praise” Vol. 1) “Blessed be the Lord” bad (because of that song)? Or if a choir which sings out of tune, is the liturgy then wrong because the choir is made up of inept musicians? When mass is held in a building with extravagant and outlandish decor, is the liturgy itself then bad? Should the priest happens to say something funny, is the liturgy then bad?

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:53 PM (EDT):

@Simcha’s husband I am more interested in Christs Judgment and Wrath,,,Simcha anger is a very healthy thing, sorry if I dont goose step to the liberal thought process but I dont and never will. Death to the Folk Mass

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:47 PM (EDT):

“Long live anger?” Someone is yanking our chain, folks. Nice try, Canisius, but real SSPX folks generally use more biblical imagery. Try Googling “Jeremiah”—you will find plenty of angry phrases which will come in handy when you are bored and want to crap up someone’s combox.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:44 PM (EDT):

@Pam, art and environment as well as bad music were also on my list. Simcha seems to think that we should just roll over and play dead at Masses that are sub-standard. The problem is that a lot of this stuff arises from the false notion of the alleged “Spirit of Vatican II” than what Sacrosanctum Concilium actually mandated.

@Canisius, while I think that Lovingmama and Kahili are wrong, what you posted is quite offensive. We disagree in charity with the point that the person is making; not with the person herself. Using derogatory language is sinful and offensive.

Posted by Simcha's husband on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:42 PM (EDT):

Ahh, Canisius, way to bring the love of Christ.

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:40 PM (EDT):

@Kahil I am not your brother and you are not mine…Death to the Folk Mass.. long live the SSPX

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:39 PM (EDT):

@ Loving Maman I reject your love dont want it dont need it…Death to the Folk Mass long live anger

Posted by Loving mama on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:37 PM (EDT):

@Canisius - Yes Canisius, I even love you.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:37 PM (EDT):

@Lovingmama, I think that you have missed the point of the problems with these “ugly Masses”. Loving one another also means charitably correcting one another as well. To reduce Jesus and the Mass to some “flower child” experience is to do great harm. Simply riding with the current does not work.

@Kahili You brought up the pharisees and Jesus’ description of white sepulchers, perhaps you might want to know the real meaning behind his words. Jesus chastized the Pharisees because they were imposing priestly purification practices on the people. Jesus never critized the cultic sacrificial worship of Ancient Israel because the ritual pointed to His perfect sacrifice, the same Holy Sacrifice that we call the Mass. So, do I take your approach as being one of “if you can’t beat them, join them?” That would be wrong.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:37 PM (EDT):

Thank you, Pam.

Posted by Kahili on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:36 PM (EDT):

@Canisius, I just reread your comment, and I didn’t mean to confirm your assumption. Please reread what I wrote - you’ll see that I’m not saying anyone is a heap of filth. Peace, brother.

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:36 PM (EDT):

@Kahil you are another brainless liberal,,,your Amchurch anyway not the True Church… Death to the Folk Mass screw Loving Mama, she sounds like a man hating lesbian

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:35 PM (EDT):

@Michelle—Thanks for indulging my impatience! :)

What you describe are ABUSES of the liturgy. It’s not what Simcha’s talking about. She is not advocating putting up with liturgical abuse. She is talking about the reality that sometimes we have to go to a Mass where things are not to our LIKING. There is nothing inherently wrong with music that is done to the best of the abilities of the musicians. But it may not be your cup of tea. There is nothing inherently wrong with some forms of modern art; it just may not appeal to you. (Other forms of modern art are just plain incomprehensible.)
As examples:
http://lenarpoetry.blogspot.com/2010_10_01_archive.html

OCP gets a lot of grief, and much of it is well earned. Yet, the same Music Issue that contains the heretical “Lord of the Dance,” also has the sublime “Panis Angelicus.” One might walk into an unfamiliar parish, see OCP books in the pews, and leave because of an assumption that could prove to be incorrect.

Ugly, just like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. Heresy and abuses are not.

Simcha’s article is NOT talking about lying down and taking heresy and abuse. It is talking about accepting legitimate and sanctioned differences, that may not be to our liking.

Were the TLM the only Mass available to me, I would go and be glad, even though I do not prefer it. Why? Because Jesus is there. How many people drive by countless Catholic parishes which celebrate an authentic, proper Novus Ordo mass, because it is their opinion that it’s not good enough? Is Jesus not also there? Who would DARE to say that Jesus is any less present?

In matters of preference, we sometimes have to take it in the chin. In matters of validity, we NEVER have to take it in the chin.

And if we can agree with that, then we agree.

Posted by Kahili on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:31 PM (EDT):

@Canisius, you prove my point. I’m with @Loving mama all the way.

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:27 PM (EDT):

@ Kahil so those of us who point out the liturgical blasphemey are now filth. Death to the Folk Mass

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:23 PM (EDT):

@ Loving mama do you have the same mealy mouthed words for us who attend the TLM

Posted by Kahili on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:18 PM (EDT):

I’ve done my fair share of liturgical policing and reading Michelle’s and other comments reminds me of why I learned to stop worrying and love the folk mass. There are things I’ve done in the name of correcting liturgical issues of which I am not proud. I have needlessly hurt people, assumed I knew their motives, and reveled in my righteousness (through analysis, syllogism, or just plain wishful thinking).

YES, having a beautiful, correct liturgy IS important. It is pleasing to God and it is good for our souls. But advancing liturgical correctness without love or charity or doing it for the sake of our own glory (see! I’m right!) can be far uglier than the abuse (real or imagined) that we are trying to correct.

We can wave the right documents over our heads like some kind of war trophy - and we can humiliate and demean people in the process. I know, I’ve done it. I didn’t really see it, though, until I started running into people who liked to say things like the “Novus Ordo is mass for retards”. They spent more time meditating on what is wrong with the parish priest, the pope, the JOOOOS, than on the Gospel. That isn’t an offering to God, that is a heap of filth. If you want to get all Bible-quoty, it’s the part where Jesus says they’re like sepulchers - all white and shiny on the outside but on the inside full of dead man’s bones.

I say, let’s improve the liturgy and work to make it holy and pleasing. But let’s do it with love and humility and a constant awareness of our own ugliness.

Posted by Loving mama on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:15 PM (EDT):

Thank you Simcha for the very intelligent, heart-felt piece! In response to some of the more inflamed commentors I’d like to say, it is all very simple; 1)love eachother, 2)keep your eyes focused on Christ and 3) if you want a more ‘beautiful’ liturgy, bring your gifts to the table to make it so.
God bless our beautiful faith community, warts and all.
Amen

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:52 PM (EDT):

@Pam: I had computer problems. The internet froze just as I was typing and it deleted what I had wanted to post.

In my opinion, this is what constitutes ugly liturgy: playing fast and loose with the rubrics (including paraphrasing the official prayers of the Church, changing the words of the Lectionary around, having laity preach in lieu of a homily, etc), “dancing”, music that does not conform to the standards set forth in Sacrametum Caritatis (no generic compositions, no questionable theology), questionable homilies and a lack of understanding of proper art and environment (the decorations should not overwhelm the sanctuary).

@Canisius, I do not advocate fleeing to the SSPX until they are fully reconciled with Rome. SSPX is not an option for the time being, unless they return to the fold.

I experienced an Anglican-Use Mass at its full, solemn beauty. While these communities are a little rare (especially down here in the South Texas hinterland), they are incredible. They are also in union with Rome.

I imagine with the new Orinariate coming, many more of these parishes will pop up and offer the faithful a viable alternative to the ugly liturgies.

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:43 PM (EDT):

@Michelle, I am still not clear on what you consider to be “bad liturgy.” Is a mass which includes the use of “Blessed be the Lord” bad? Or is it a mass which includes a choir which sings out of tune? Is it a mass held in a building with extravagant and outlandish decor? Is it a mass during which the priest happens to say something funny?
TIA, and God bless.

Posted by L.T. on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:31 PM (EDT):

What makes liturgy ugly is the degree we have inserted ourselves, our egos, our Old Adams into it and defaced the icon of Christ in the Mass. The ancient maxim is lex orandi, lex credendi, which is how the ancient churches worshiped “in spirit and in truth.” It’s not about some abstract aestheticism, antiquarianism, perfectionism, or personal tastes (it’s Protestant to always reduce arguments to those categories). Traditionalists should not be accused wholesale of being Pharisaical jerks, and your suggestion that unless we agree with you we’re Pharisees is a particularly self-flattering form of reverse Pharisaism (thank God I’m not a traddie or eastern riter).

Humility and thankfulness are always the right attitude for worship but they are never an apology, excuse, or justification for ugly liturgy intentionally produced to suit the times or to be relevant and appealing to the unformed masses. Liturgy is for disciples of Christ, co-sufferers with Christ, not for teen-spirit or happy-clappy consumerized Americans. Christ is among us, but He is not defined by our modern American culture, so to shoehorn the Mass to fit our culture is what distorts and disfigures the Mass into the abominations we now see. It is presumptuous and neither humble nor thankful to assume that Christ “can stand” our modern liturgies. Plenty of Scripture teaches that God is totally disgusted with our sacrifices even when we have “good intentions.” This is why I find much more comfort in the Eastern rite, where the constant, sobering refrain is “Lord have mercy” again and again; where the focus is truly on Christ among us, revealing the Father in the Spirit. There are no Oprah-like stunts using children as props to make us feel good about ourselves. No stunts, no me-centered creativity or experimentation, no cults of personality, no performance or entertainment mentality, no jokey irreverence that has no sense of the glory and grandeur of God in Christ. Eastern liturgies are virtual incarnations of humility and thankfulness, even if the people in them remain capable of hardheartedness.

Your call to humility and thankfulness is only more, not less, reason to reject the majority of what passes as liturgy in the modern Latin rite.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:29 PM (EDT):

Michelle. I have by no means presented myself as an expert on liturgy, and I am not advocating for heresy or sin. What “assessment” is it that needs citation? I was talking about a state of mind which might be helpful to some people. I see that it’s not helpful to you, so why don’t you just forget about it?

I’m not sure how to convince you that I’m not advocating liturgical abuse. Our family has left parishes because of it.

Pam and I have both expressed gratitude for the efforts of liturgical reformers, and have been answered with a hostility which is unbecoming. I am going to bow out of this discussion with you now, because I know that I don’t have anything else to add to it.

Posted by Canisius on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:27 PM (EDT):

Smash the tamborines and burn the burlap,,,,long live the TLM and the Eastern Rites, you VII Catholics can keep your heresy since you have done all you could to destroy the Church from within (which is what liberals do anyway, destroy from within) Just something for your NO’ers to think about. Was in Paris 3 months ago, when it was time for Sunday Mass, I checked out 3 different parishes,all of them about empty, then I went to the SSPX Chapel (by no means small) jammed to the gills…Ugly is ugly and beauty is beauty…and Ugly is not good enough for Christ

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:17 PM (EDT):

Ms. Fisher: Perhaps reading the documents is one qualifier. While you have stated your feelings about the matter, it still seems to me that you don’t really see the danger about being exposed to these kind of liturgies, especially where children are concerned.

Perhaps if you were to cite the Church’s documents that agree with your assessment, that might help.

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:15 PM (EDT):

Michelle, I understand mistaking my comments for sarcasm, but I assure they are not sarcastic. I am not attacking orthodoxy. I would never attack orthodoxy. So I’m not sure why you feel the need to defend it.

My questions are sincere: what do you mean by the term “bad liturgy”? I think if I could grasp what you mean by it, I might be able to understand the rest of what you’re saying.

The thing is: I don’t think you are understanding what Simcha means by “ugly liturgy.”

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:11 PM (EDT):

Michelle asked: “I would also like to know Ms. Fisher’s qualifications for writing about liturgy.”

I wasn’t really writing about liturgy; I was writing about the emotional and spiritual state of a normal human being. What are your qualifications for writing about that?

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:06 PM (EDT):

@Pam, I served on my diocesan liturgical commission for three years. While I do not have formal education, I have read the documents. Your sarcasm is not very helpful here. It seems that the more someone tries to defend orthdoxy, the more one gets attacked.

The question here is not about my qualifications, but, abuot Ms. Fisher’s. With all due respect, what experience does she have with liturgy? What qualifies her to write about this subject?

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 3:00 PM (EDT):

How are you defining “bad liturgy?” Is a mass which includes the use of “Blessed be the Lord” bad? Or is it a mass which includes a choir which sings out of tune? Is it a mass held in a building with extravagant and outlandish decor? Is it a mass during which the priest happens to say something funny?

I suspect the problem being had is a lack of agreement on what constitutes a “bad liturgy.” Perhaps you could explain what you mean by it.

Are you a liturgist? Such input would be extremely helpful, and I’m sure your parish is utterly grateful for it. I know our parish would love to have access to a skilled, knowledgeable liturgist.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 2:52 PM (EDT):

@Pam, Redemptionis Sacramentum actually gives the faithful the chance to do something about bad liturgy. It seems to me that those who insist on defending Simcha should actually read the documents of the Church. A reading of such would actually prove enlightening.

I wonder if I am reading the NCRegister or the other NCR with all of the comments being posted here. I would also like to know Ms. Fisher’s qualifications for writing about liturgy.

Posted by Pam on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 2:46 PM (EDT):

Does anyone else get the feeling that people are confusing “ugly” (which is a matter of perspective—“Holy, Holy, Holy,” played on the organ may be ugly to someone who prefers, “Blessed Be the Lord” on guitar) with “illicit and invalid,” which IS WRONG?

I do not think that I am on par with Christ; therefore I will leave the actual turning over of tables to Him. Meanwhile, I’ll keep offering the best I can.

Meanwhile, I’m reminded of a very 1970’s church song, which we sang for our First Communion in 1973
“Your holy people standing washed in your blood, Spirit filled yet hungry we await your food. We are poor but we’ve brought ourselves the best we could, we are yours.”

Navel-gazing lyrics aside, if we have truly brought ourselves the best we could, then we have nothing to worry about.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 2:17 PM (EDT):

@Sam, the “humility” agument that Simcha raises really does not work here, either. Repeated exposure to ugly liturgy, especially that which has abuse, is a dangerous thing. Simply “grinning and bearing it” is not a real option.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 2:14 PM (EDT):

One other observation about Simcha’s blog post, in relation to the excellent rebuttal in the other blog is the fact that Jesus did, in fact, take matters into his own hands when he threw out the moneychangers and the vendors from the Temple.

These vendors were corrupting the Sacred Space reserved for the Gentiles. These vendors and moneychangers had set-up shop in the Court of the Gentiles.

Posted by Sam Schmitt on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 2:11 PM (EDT):

So . . . if we are confronted with an ugly liturgy we have two options (a) bitterness, and (b) humility. (b) is definitely the better option - no argument there!

What pains me about ugly liturgies is not so much my own discomfort or embarrassment as the lack of honor and reverence due to God. It’s not so much the “ugliness” as the feeling that the priest and parish don’t really care very much how mass is celebrated. That hurts.

That’s why I tend to get annoyed by the “The Mass is the Mass” sort of comment - as if we should just grin and bear it when liturgies are not just “not good enough” but positively offensive and ugly. After all Jesus is still there! True enough. But isn’t that like saying “I can give my mother my old (dirty) pair of socks for Christmas. After all - it’s the thought that counts! The love is still there.” But love is expressed in the gift itself, not just the “thought.” Beauty is not an afterthought tackled on to the mass as a last minute option - Benedict XVI has spoken eloquently about the power of beauty in the liturgy as a principal means whereby we can experience God. Ugliness is more than unfortunate or bothersome - it can be a real block to people taking in the full meaning of what is going on.

Having said that, given that inadequate liturgies are unavoidable, I suppose Simcha’s advice is the best we can do at times. I’m just afraid of the notion that “humility” requires us to be “content” with careless celebrants or sentimental music will lead us to lose sight of the importance of beauty.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 2:05 PM (EDT):

Having re-read Simcha’s responses and the link to the other blogger’s response, I am convinced that my reading of Simcha’s blog was actually correct.

There is a misconception here about “ugliness” of the human being. When God embarked on creating the earth, recall that at the end of each day, He looked about and found what He had done to be good. On the evening of the sixth day, God made a rather startling pronouncement when He saw the beings that He made in His own image and likeness. He proclaimed them to be “very good”. “Good” here does not meam average. “Good” means perfect. When God says that man and woman are “very good”, it’s almost as if He said “very perfect”, a phrase that, while sounding grammatically incorrect, is the closest that we will come to expressing what “very good” in the creation story means.

Sin mars the soul, yes. But, in Baptism, as in Confession, with God’s help, we chip away at the ugliness that sin brings about in order to help restore our beauty.

Merely accepting ugly liturgy is not a good thing. Consistently being exposed to it does a great deal of harm. While Simcha seems to not recommend that we go to these on a regular basis, I still wonder what the real point of her article is.

Posted by maria on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 1:53 PM (EDT):

Melissa, thank you because your comment pointed out to me the obvious lack of encouragement to Simcha in my post. I apologize Simcha I have no excuse. I got wrapped up in my point and lost sight of you. When you answer the Lords… whom shall I send? With your …here I am Lord I come to do your will. It will NOT be comfortable but perhaps that is the purpose. In my life the Lord has used discomfort to change my comfort zone. To take me from “good grief I must have done something wrong or I would feel better about the outcome” to did I do right by the Lord according to His definition of right? And what is His definition of right exactly? And is He pleased with me? Those questions right there, for me at least, are the whole point. Those questions are my soul seeking the Lord and His righteousness quite the long road to hoe as we say in my neck of the woods. Your article was thoughtful and insightful. The Lord has used you to bring attention to this MOST important matter. There is nothing more important than the Mass It is the foundation of everything and nothing else affects our lives as greatly. That said I do not envy you your position as lightening rod here. Having read your article I can see where the Lord has given you talents equal to the task. In your writing I also saw someone who loves the Lord very much and is willing to suffer for Him. In my estimation this makes you an asset to The Faith and anyone fortunate enough to call you friend.
Numbers 6:24-2
The LORD bless you and keep you!
The LORD let his face shine upon you, and be gracious to you!
The LORD look upon you kindly and give you peace!
So shall they invoke my name upon the Israelites, and I will bless them.”

Your sister in Christ

Posted by Margaret Farr on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 1:02 PM (EDT):

I love you. Thank you for finding a new vocabulary for me—I’ve been stuck in the despairing, disdainful, arm-flapping mode re: these masses for 20 years. (We’re converts, or it would have been longer.)

Posted by ICXC+NIKA on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 10:54 AM (EDT):

Pam,
It’s Slava Isusu Christu! To which one replies, Slava Na Viki! Thanks for the greeting. I do completely understand where Simcha is coming from, having experienced many an irreverent liturgy over the years in our diocese. Yes, it can be difficult—in some places impossible—to find an Eastern Catholic parish in many parts of the US. We are blessed beyond measure by our tiny parish &, should it close, we are willing to drive into the next state to attend the Divine Liturgy . My biggest concern is the effect of irreverent liturgies on impressionable children. We’ve been there & aren’t willing to do that again if at all possible. I’ve never experienced “One Day at a Time” at Mass…but we have experienced John Denver’s “Country Roads”...Lord have mercy.
God bless—

Maria, in the last comment Simcha made here, she said that her article was written for those who have done *everything in there power* to help correct problems and encourage reverence. She doesn’t at all advocate passive reaction. But sometimes, no matter how hard we try, there is going to be something not quite as it should be. That is where this article begins, and that is where we can learn to make the most, and best, of a bad situation. That’s what I’m getting of her stance, at least. :)

Posted by maria on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 7:04 AM (EDT):

Simcha, I think I understand where you were trying to go with your article but I get the feeling from reading your last post that it took you to a completely different destination…kinda hair raising isn’t it? I wish I could tell you that it gets easier but I’m 50 and so far it hasn’t. Many times I have started out on what I thought was the right direction only to find that God has completely led me somewhere else. When I was younger,though not as often now thank the good Lord, I’d go right back to the start and retrace my steps. Over and over and over kinda like a dog chasing its tail. Now-a-days, by the grace of God, I’m more likely to sit, pray for Light a lot of it and look carefully at what’s around. I have always found that God doesn’t usually put me where I am comfortable. Nor, as has been the case so far, does He want me to get comfortable. Instead He moves me because there is something He wants me to do. Catholicism is a hard road. From Jesus’ parable about “The Narrow Gate” to His death on the cross He made it clear. The first Apostles didn’t have it any easier. How many of those first Apostles do you think would sit still and allow any disrespect for God in their presence? Not Liturgical abuse but any disrespect? Can you imagine St. Peter or St. Paul saying nothing as people behaved even the slightest bit irreverent? God has outlined clearly what is fitting worship. As was said in a previous post “valid Masses require proper matter, form, and intent” the information is available to all, all you have to do is look. And make no mistake it is every Catholics obligation to know, preach and defend The Faith. For those who have the resources to seek and learn saying that we were not told or that we did not know will not save us. To bear with insults to our person patiently is humility. However, to say nothing as others are blatantly irreverent to our Lord and Savior is frankly cowardice. Believe me I understand the inclination well I’ve been their. Question, if we humans have the right to choose how we will allow others to treat us? What makes any one think that the King of all does not have that same right? God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow…so the same God that cursed Adam, Eve all their descendants and all the earth for 1 disobedience and also struck the Levite Priests dead on the spot for even 1 minor Liturgical abuse is also the same God that will sit in Judgment of you and I. Yes, God is Love and Mercy but you forget that he is also pure Justice to the peril of your own soul.

Posted by Melissa on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 6:11 AM (EDT):

Simcha—welcome. I don’t regularly read NCR and stumbled on this via Twitter, but from one journalist-type to another, thank you so much for saying eloquently what I’ve tried to for ages. Your “Mass for retards” comment strikes particularly close to home—I know quite a few individuals who are fond of suggesting I “say no to the NO”; at times even the term “NOtard” has been thrown around. I love the richness of our traditions and the beauty of our liturgy, but behavior like that makes me almost proud of my own, Haugen-infused (God help me) NO. At least there we’re…not so quick to demean. :( And at my university, Mass is in a finished, remodeled basement with a simple altar and a piano in need of tuning. But the homilies are outstanding, and the people there are on fire for Christ in the Eucharist. That, to me, is incredibly beautiful in the sight of God. Rock on. :D

Posted by Guillaume+ on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 5:00 AM (EDT):

Thanks a lot for this great article. I am a young priest deeply attached to the beauty of the liturgy. I often feel what you described (that sensation of being the only one in the room who comprehends the travesty that is happening around us) and your article helps me let go a little bit.
Again, Thanks al lot.

Guillaume+

PS. Pardon my English - I am French.

Posted by Kenneth on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:48 AM (EDT):

Oh yes, I forgot in all of that to mention one very important thing:

Thanks, Simcha, great article!

Posted by Kenneth on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 4:31 AM (EDT):

It’s best, I believe, to make the parish church and liturgy as beautiful as possible. Pope Benedict XVI has made statements asserting that fact.

Yes, we’re all a bunch of ugly, unworthy children of Eve, but for goodness sake, there are angels and Saints, and Jesus, and our beautiful Mother, the Blessed Virgin with us at every Mass. Glorified. Beyond our wildest dreams!

I like the idea of doing penance, of sorts, and enduring an “ugly little liturgy”, and I agree with the statement that that’s a good reflection of who we all are. I appreciate that fact which is behind the author’s point. Maybe it’s a fact we do tend to forget when we get too comfortable.

The thing is, though, it’s when I’m in the presence of great beauty, majesty, and grandeur, that I am best able to put things into their proper perspective. Here’s what heaven is — and then there’s me. And then when I thank God for counting me worthy to stand in His presence and serve…” and say “Lord I am not worthy to receive you…”, I really know what it is He is giving me and how far, far, far away from that beauty, majesty, and grandeur I truly am without Him. But through Him, with Him, and in Him, I may be taken in. Then my heart is lifted up to the Lord, and not wallowing around down here in all my ugliness.

No, I don’t want any more ugliness in the liturgy/church. I’m ugly enough already. My whole life has been and is festering with ugliness. And when I get into a Mass where the ugliness is made out to be holy, then what have I to hope for?

Of course, He is present there, in the Sacraments, no matter how ugly we are or the liturgy is. But, ignorant beast that I am, my human senses need to be surrounded with as much earthly beauty in the church as possible, to give me hope that one day, one day I too might rise above all of my own ugliness, and truly see Him and know Him and love Him and serve Him in all the heavenly beauty of His kingdom, my one true home.

Let me have a little taste of it now, have mercy on me, please, and then perhaps I will not lose hope and begin to think that this ugliness that I am is all there is, or that it is somehow something to be honoured and wallowed in and passed off as holy.

This is what this ugly little liturgy is doing, I believe, to too many people. It offers us ignorant beasts no hope. If this piece of Heaven is so sensibly ugly, then it is no different from me. How completely debilitating that has to be to all souls. Even if they seem to want it. Perhaps the person who described it as “retarded” made a very poor word choice, although appropriate in so many ways.

I am handicapped in every respect and for the mass to appear to say to all my ignorant human senses, “that’s all there is so let’s smile and make the best of it”, is retarding me — is taking away my hope.

Posted by Michelle on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 2:25 AM (EDT):

@Nina: What you described may be what is happening, but, it is certainly not the way the Church is supposed to worship.

@Simcha, thank you for the clarification. For a good long time, I had been a wandering Amerean throughout my city. The problem with a lot of the “ugly” is that, at least in my area, there is poor liturgical catechesis and formation for both the clergy and the laity. Not a few choirs are totally unfamiliar with Music Sacram or any of the liturgical documents of the Church. In fact, a lot of the parishes use OCP heavily because that is all they have been exposed to, thanks to that publishing house’s slick marketing job. As far as a good deal of the rest of the diocese, the same holds true for the GIRM and Redemptionis Sacramentum.

The Church posts her documents online for a reason: read them and heed them. If your parish is doing something strange, read the GIRM and RS. Charitably let your pastor know. Every Catholic has the right to a properly celebrated Mass. RS guarantees that. If your pastor does not want to remedy the serious liturgical abuses, write your bishop. If that does not work, you have access to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. You might get persecuted, but, the integrity, the dignity and the beauty of the Mass is a battle worth waging.

My parish is far from perfect, but, we are making baby steps towards improving things.

Posted by Jean Emerson on Wednesday, Feb 23, 2011 12:21 AM (EDT):

I went for 4 years to an ‘ugly’church and it broke me up. The church itself was quite lovely but the Blessed Sacrament was shoved in a corner and ignored. No one genuflected, though some “bowed to the altar’. I’d have been glad to have some “happy clappy’ music at Mass but the music was all about US: “we are…” “we do…” in mournful and unpredictable dirges. Everyone chatted loudly before Mass started and some even during Mass. The priests made jokes before, during and after Mass. The homilies mostly told us “Jesus didn’t really say this… or do that…the gospel writers only wrote that because…” No one knelt even at the consecration. I could go on and on. I tried to cope. I even told myself as you suggest, that if Jesus can come, I can. I prayed and prayed for the church and the priests. But after 3 years I was in despair “Does anyone in this church believe anything??”

So this year I drive to a more outlying church. Now this church IS ugly
but the priests are devout and reverent and I’m glad I made the move.

Posted by Nina on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 11:53 PM (EDT):

Re: the last comment by Pam. It’s fine to prefer the Novus Ordo! I don’t think it should be US vs. THEM…..ever. How about attending both, if and when it is possible, and thanking GOD you get to go to Mass and have the privilege of being Catholic at all, and receiving the Eucharist—-God Himself. And that there are different rites. Totally agree that it is about God’s (I contend, perhaps permissive) Will, and not about us. And again, I do think Simcha hit the nail on the head abou that point. It doesn’t matter why: God may be chastizing us, testing us, whatever…..BUT THIS IS the way the majority of the Church worships now. It is not for retards.

If HE is there, we should be content. If it’s disturbing to some people aesthetically, close your eyes, or mortify your senses. You may gain MORE grace.

Simcha: I missed where the “Novus Ordo is for retards” comment. Where was that?

Posted by Rosie H. on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 11:46 PM (EDT):

A great article! So balanced and understanding! I see that Simcha just made this point, but I think it bears repeating: guitars and round church buildings and shaking hands at the sign of peace are in a completely different category from koolade and doritos communion or heresy preached in the sermon. Bad taste doesn’t “offend” God the way actual abuses do, because God does not see the way we see; he looks into the heart. He desn’t say “St. Aloysius’s and St. Patrick’s are both trying to give glory to me and show me love, but at St. Patrick’s they have chant, and at St. Aloysius they clapped during the final hymn! I like St. Patrick’s better.” In one way, beautiful music and art are the most fitting offering to God—I say in one way because what makes an offering fitting is also love from “a clean and contrite heart”—but do you think he only accepts offerings that are aesthetically the best? God accepts everything from his children who love him, including terrible music and distracted prayers. Wouldn’t you love a badly-spelled love letter from your husband? Or, to borrow an analogy from a commentor elsewhere, a badly-made, cheesy present from your little child?

In any case—Thank God you have access to the Divine Liturgy. I don’t even know where the closest one is to where I live. In some places in the midwest, it’s hundreds of miles away.

In fact, in some places in the midwest, you have to go at least a hundred miles to find a parish where a twangy rendition of “One Day at a Time,” isn’t even in the musical repertoire, much less a regularly used opening song. I speak from experience.

Live in the middle of nowhere for a couple years, where you’re lucky to even FIND a Catholic parish that has Mass every week, where you just thank God the Mass is as least valid and licit. You will then completely understand what Simcha’s talking about. You might get lucky and end up at the last Catholic parish at the end of the road that celebrates the TLM—only be ME. Because I prefer the Novus Ordo.

Hey, I don’t think you have anything to apologize for! We’re all discussing, and considering, and musing, right? It’s a good intellectual exercise—-! ;) Some of us need it, to keep ourselves sharp. :) And we can count on you to make us think, Simcha, and stimulate us! Iron sharpening iron.

I am so sorry you had that kind of week. Jesus obviously loves you a lot. ;) Do you mind me asking under what circumstances they were? Wrong. Wrong that your family should be under attack. Period.

I struggle with enough ugliness from within me…I am grateful for the beautiful & reverent Divine Liturgy at our tiny Eastern Catholic parish.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 10:29 PM (EDT):

Okay, got a new keyboard.

I think there are a couple of major misunderstandings here. One is probably my fault, and one is not.

The first thing is that I did not specify what I meant by “ugly.” That was actually intentional, because I knew that when I said “ugly liturgy,” something would spring to the reader’s mind! I wanted my idea to apply universally, no matter what it was that specifically offends the reader (some people have sentimental attachments to “Eagle’s Wings” or whatever, so being specific could be misleading).

The problem is that many people thought I meant “heretical” or “abusive” or “illicit.” I did not mean any of those things, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. When I said ugly, I meant things which are technically sound, and do not break any—sorry, I don’t know the proper terminology—liturgical guidelines, or make the Mass invalid. Just those things which are, you know, crummy. Third rate. Upsettingly unpleasant. There are things that are ugly without being evil, and I wish people could acknowledge that.

When there is something going on at your church that is not just annoying but WRONG, then naturally you do whatever you can to make it stop: you talk to your priest, you talk to your bishop, you drive two hours to a better church, whatever.

And yes, several people have pointed out that it’s critical to surround our children with the finest the Church has to offer. This is something I worry about a lot with my own children, and I do the best I can. And this is why I am NOT, of course, in favor of deliberately choosing the most aesthetically squalid parish you can find. Why would you do that, whether you had kids or not? I’m talking about what to do when you find yourself in a tight spot.

As I have stated several times, I do fully, utterly, wholeheartedly understand that God wants us to offer our very best to Him at Mass. I am in favor of this, okay? I am not in favor of ugliness, no matter how trivial or offensive it is.

I am talking about how we are to behave when everyone with any influence has done the best they could, and we are still left with something that is pretty awful.

The second misunderstanding is not my fault. Many people, including Michelle and others, are questioning my motives for writing this article. They wonder why anyone would advocate for more ugliness, which is so clearly destroying the Church in America! Why would anyone do such a thing!

Well, of course this is not what I’m doing. That’s just silly. Here’s the thing: to those of you who object so strenuously to my ideas—tell me, do you think that what the world needed was another 800 words pointing out that things are in a sorry state? Do we need another rant or lament about liturgical abuses? Do we need yet another itemization of what is wrong with the world today? I don’t know about you, but I already know all about that. I get that the state of things is unacceptable. But it doesn’t do me any spiritual good to read more and more and more about what a terrible state things are in.

I wrote this because I had a long week in which my fellow Catholics were, frankly, horrible to me and my family. Knowing nothing about us except that we attend a Novus Ordo Mass, they ripped into our understanding of the faith and our relationship with God. And you know what? Among serious Catholics, that kind of attitude is considered unfortunate, but understandable, because . . .the Church is in such a terrible state today, blah blah blah. How come not one single person was horrified at the “Novus Ordo is Mass for retards” line? This is an idea which comes straight out of Hell! But people are used to hearing stuff like this, and silently agreeing with it in one dark corner of their hearts because . . .the Church is in such a terrible state today, blah blah blah.

All I’m trying to say is: look at yourself when you say stuff like that. Look at whose side you’re on.

I’m not wallowing; I’m not smug. I’m not the one who is content with things the way they are. I’m trying to DO something about it, in the only arena that I have any control over at the moment—which is my own heart.

So I do apologize most sincerely for the misunderstandings which were my fault. I hope that you will be patient with me as I get used to writing for the Register. Thank you to all of you for reading and taking the trouble to respond. To Michelle and others who have spent time and energy trying to make things better: THANK YOU! You don’t know how grateful I am when I see the improvements that you in the trenches have made. We need you desperately.

I think I can understand how frustrating it must be to hear people say, “Oh, music doesn’t really matter, decor is trivial—what matters is what’s in your heart.” But please: that’s not what I was saying. If you’re going to argue that beauty is very important—well, I’m on your side!

Posted by Michelle on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 7:24 PM (EDT):

@JamesD, that is an interesting observation. We tend to focus a lot on the reception of Holy Communion, but, not on the actual Sacrifice. For example, we are only obligated to receive Holy Communion once a year, but, we are obligated to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass on Sundays and all Holy Days of Obligation.

One of the comments implied that we should teach the children that music really does not matter. Music does matter. Sadly, we have seen an increasnig amount of Protestant Praise and Worship music infiltrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This style is not consistent with the sacred music advocated by the documents of the Church. Even Pope Benedict XVI states that certainly one song is not as good as another insofar as the Mass is concerned. Music does matter.

We believe as we pray. Anyone ever heard of the phrase lex orandi, lex credendi?

Posted by Jitpring on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 7:21 PM (EDT):

What an odd article. Surely the writer is aware that such events are offensive to God. Why then encourage participation in such offense? And the writer is surely aware that valid Masses require proper matter, form, and intent. Yet all of these, especially the priest’s intent, are highly doubtful at such events. Are we simply to seek the false glow of false humility? No thanks.

Lex orandi lex credendi.

Posted by Athol on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 7:16 PM (EDT):

Congratulations Simcha. You have really got people going. Everyone wants to get in the discussion. You deserve that gin-the Queen Mother swore by the daily gin and she lived till 101. Thanks for an interesting discussion topic. Keep up the good work.

Posted by simcha fisher on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 6:48 PM (EDT):

[Due to a broken keyboard, and a sudden gin shortage, Simcha will be unable to respond for the next few hours. ]
my husband, ladies and gents - he’llbe here all nite.
kyboard really is broken - onscreen keypad painfully slow. back asap,play nice

Posted by J.C. on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 6:44 PM (EDT):

“There is nothing wrong with trying to find a parish that is faithful to the norms and tries earnestly to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as it should be,” Michelle writes (very diplomatically, I might add!) This is true. I would only add, that it may actually be spiritually detrimental to you and your children if you don’t. (Note: If you can’t, then there’s nothing else to discuss, you can’t.)

Posted by JamesD on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 6:40 PM (EDT):

The author shows an over emphasis on Communion, and no mention of the SACRIFICE, or the propitiation of our God. So how much do you think God is propitiated when you desecrate the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Jesus?

Posted by Simcha's husband on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 6:40 PM (EDT):

Due to a broken keyboard, and a sudden gin shortage, Simcha will be unable to respond for the next few hours.

Posted by J.C. on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 6:38 PM (EDT):

Hey, Pam, take it up with Simcha Fisher! :) I didn’t mean to turn this into TLM vs. NO. I was trying to work under Mrs. Fisher’s assumption that there are more beautiful/more reverent Masses and there are less beautiful (ugly, her words, not mine!)/less reverent Masses. Now that I reread her article, I can see that her version of “beautiful” Mass might not even include the TLM. The same arguments apply. Drop “TLM” and insert “reverent NO.” Again, you have to get at the root of why there are displeasing aspects of some Masses, some Churches. What is the underlying theology of these choices? Liturgical music (style), liturgical architecture (decor), theology (homily content) don’t exist to please or displease those in attendance; they are didactic tools of the Church to aid in our salvation.

Posted by Michelle on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 6:35 PM (EDT):

There seems to be a lot of sarcasm here. That is sad. Simcha is not infallible, nor am I. However, it seems that everyone is circling the wagons in her defense when there is something deeper here.

Some of us have actually been in the trenches trying to restore beauty, dignity and solemnity in the Mass because we believe that there is Something, Someone greater, than ourselves.

To simply bask in the ugliness of what is happening in front of us and try to be anesthesized about it is not necessarily a good thing. There is nothing wrong with trying to find a parish that is faithful to the norms and tries earnestly to celebrate the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass as it should be.

Posted by Gary The Alligator on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 6:20 PM (EDT):

Michelle, you hit the nail on the head again! Of course we should use the finest materials, He wouldn’t want us to use the stone that has been cast out as a foundation or anything!

Posted by Michelle on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 6:13 PM (EDT):

@Erika, I think the one missing the point is Simcha. Regarding the manger, for those who keep bringing it up, this was not done within the context of the sacrificial worship of Ancient Israel.

If we look at the roots of the cultic sacrificial worship of Ancient Israel, we find that God, in fact, demanded that the finest materials be used. He went into great detail as to how the Ark was to be constructed, as well as the materials to be used for the sacred vessels and the vestments. Truly, beauty mattered as much then as it does now.

Posted by Pam on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 5:53 PM (EDT):

J.C., I must disagree. The Extraordinary Form is, indeed, profoundly holy and beautiful. The Ordinary Form is NO LESS profoundly holy and beautiful. To imply otherwise is to imply that the majority of Western Rite Catholics are participating in something—well, what ARE you saying? Are you saying that the Novus Ordo is NOT the Mass?

Our children must learn that whether the style of music or the content and delivery of the homily or the decor of the building pleases them, or does not please them, Christ is still present. No more so, nor less so, whether the E.F. or the O.F.

C.S. Lewis’s advice did not, IMO, pertain to liturgy. It pertained to the interior disposition of those worshiping.

Posted by Gary The Alligator on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 5:50 PM (EDT):

Oh my gosh J.C, you’re so right!

And another thing, what’s the deal with that stupid manger? Mangers are full of smelly animals - who bite! The place is filthy. Then you have to deal with the stupid shepherds. Those guys smell worse than the donkeys, and they don’t even know any Latin! I mean, what’s the point of going into a place like that?

Posted by J.C. on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 5:35 PM (EDT):

Attending the Latin Mass over the N.O. is not about personal preferences; it’s about offering to God the supreme worship that is due Him. It’s not about you!! Exactly! You can’t offer up offenses committed to Our Lord. (And, yes, you can offend Our Lord—remember Jesus at the temple with the merchants?) Like St. Thomas says, “To bear with patience wrongs done to oneself is a mark of perfection, but to bear with patience wrongs done to someone else is mark of imperfection and even actual sin.” (sorry, don’t have a citation for that…) So, you should offer up your suffering and be humble about all those optional ugly things that irk you surrounding the Mass—whether the grouchy old lady makes snide marks about your children’s behavior at Mass or the guy steals your space in the parking lot before Mass (or the uncharitable demeanor of TLM crowd!)—but you don’t gain anything spiritually by being an accomplice to liturgical abuse. In fact, you risk endangering the souls of your children. Exposing your children to what you call ugliness breeds a “do as I say, not as I do” theological mindset, which as parents know is not a very effective teaching technique. You are trying to instill in your children reverence for Our Lady in places where her statues are absent, respect for Christ substantially present in the Eucharist when the whole atmosphere begs to differ, the idea that the priest is an alter Christus with girl alter servers and an androgynous corpus in the Sanctuary. Specific personal circumstances aside, instead of offering up the murmuring in your heart at the ugly liturgy, sacrifice whatever it takes to get to the nearest TLM. (Yes, I know for most people, that requires great sacrifice of money, sleep, Sunday family time—that’s between you and God—only you know what you are capable of giving.) Now, to the people quoting C.S. Lewis, get a clue: as much as I love the Screwtape Letters, Lewis was an English Churchman, not really in any position to give practical liturgical advice to Catholics! J.C.

Posted by jte on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 4:23 PM (EDT):

A couple of years ago my wife and I attended a Mass while traveling through Kansas. Upon entering the sanctuary I was appalled by ugliness. From the electric votives to the resin cartoonish statues shoved off to a side room out of site. The music was terrible,the priest was the driest ever, and the “worshipers” were one of the most non-participatory groups that I had ever seen in my life! At one point I thought about attending Mass again (somewhere else). That’s when IT happened. During the elevation of the Eucharist I saw with my own eyes a vision. I won’t go into detail about what I saw but I’ll just say HOLY,HOLY,HOLY!!! I was profoundly humbled and have not been a snob since. God taught me at that saturday night Mass that HE acts through Christ’s apostles (dry or not) and as long as we have Roman Catholic Priests we have Christ. No matter what the worship space looks like.

Posted by Erika on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 3:42 PM (EDT):

It seems most people have missed the point of Simcha’s piece.

From my perspective I think the points made here were excellent and worth taking to heart.

Posted by Veronica N. on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 3:38 PM (EDT):

Welcome, Simcha! What a treat it is to have you blogging at NCR!

Posted by Michelle on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 2:43 PM (EDT):

Simcha, I have volunteered to serve on my parish liturgical committee and I also did three years at the diocesan level. I bore most of the weight of planning diocesan liturgies during those three years. Thank God, for the first year, I was blessed with a rector at the Cathedral who truly cared about a proper ars celebrandi. However, shortly thereafter, things changed and it all went downhill and fast. I also volunteered at my father’s parish for awhile to help them wtih their liturgies and tried to work with one of the local ecclesial movements to provide better liturgical formation to the young people.

Sadly, down here, it has gotten to the point, at least in my diocese, that we have settled for mediocrity.

It’s the Cain and Abel syndrome. The reason why Cain’s sacrifice was not quite pleasing was that he did not offer the best he had. Abel, on the other hand, offered the choicest lamb. In the case of the episode you cited from St. Francis, I do not think that it is applicable here. Short of a miraculous cure, the leper could not change his situation. That does not necessarily hold true in a lot of the parishes today. The Church offers us documents to follow. The Holy See has taken great pains to urge English speaking conferences that they need to catechize the faithful regarding the coming changes to the Roman Missal.

So, in answer to your question, I have tried to do what I can.

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 2:16 PM (EDT):

Hi, Michelle. The reason I didn’t respond to criticisms is that I felt that others were doing a fine job of drawing out my point (and yes, also because I have eight kids, plus an overnight guest, and six loads of laundry to do!). I appreciate you reading the piece twice, but you have not seen the point, and Kahili saw it exactly. Renee summed it up perfectly (in two sentences!):

“if you can find a beautiful Mass, then go for it. But if not, don’t add to the woe by being judgmental and ugly within.”

Not only don’t add to it, but try and get some benefit from it. No, I am not extolling ugliness in liturgy. If you will reread my first and last paragraphs, you will see that. I am extremely sensitive to my aesthetic surroundings. I have studied art, music, and Latin. I spent three months in Rome, and the Folk Mass here at home literally gives me a headache. And I do understand that it’s not just about being pretty, because pretty is nicer for us: I understand that the purpose of beauty (at Mass and everywhere) is to glorify God. I cringe at the tambourines partly because they hurt my head, and partly because I hate to participate in such a crappy offering.

So, no, it’s not that mediocrity is okay. It’s just that (a) sometimes we have no choice, and (b) we can fool ourselves that we’re fighting for beauty, when all we’re doing is adding to ugliness, interiorly. I was thinking more of St. Francis meeting the leper: at first he passed by in repulsion—but then he realized that he had just given Christ the cold shoulder. So he turned back and forced himself to embrace the leper. Was St. Francis extolling leprosy? Or he was looking for Christ, and what he happened to have in front of him was a leper?

Sometimes what we have in front of us is a leper. We can’t change that. What we can control is our response to the leper.

If we have the means, perhaps we can heal the leper: do everything you possibly can to make your church beautiful and reverent. Michelle, you say, “Many, if not most, parishes here in the United States are not in such bad situations that they could not at least make an effort at improving the Mass and infusing the Holy Sacrifice with solemnity, dignity and majesty.” So, what effort have you made? Offered to train a choir? Donated marble statues? Taken over a First Communion class to ensure that a new generation has proper reverence for the Eucharist?

I haven’t done any of these things, because I don’t have the time, money, or energy. What I used to do was sit in my pew and carry on a whining, grousing commentary in my head all during Mass. Eventually, I realized that my attitude was far uglier than the terrible, irreverent music and decor. It’s bad enough to be surrounded by ugliness; but now I was making it worse.

Posted by Mrs McG on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 2:13 PM (EDT):

@Michelle—I think what is problematic in the piece is the suggestion at one point in the article (perhaps, inadvertent) that ugliness is in itself “good” for us and something we should seek out for our the sake of our souls. The reality is that it can never be “good for us”—but when we have to, we can use the opportunity for good—endure the ugliness humbly as Christ does and use the experience as an opportunity to remind ourselves that, yes, it is indeed unworthy, and so are we all unworthy.

Simcha does say: “We should build beautiful churches. We should make our music lovely….But since the Lord does not deem it time — let’s take advantage. Let’s learn what we can from ugliness. And let’s not add to it in our hearts.” She’s clearly not advocating the advancement of ugliness.

Posted by Michelle on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 1:41 PM (EDT):

It’s not about being self-centered Rob. It is about the fact that in many liturgies today, especially those in my diocese, it’s about stressing the “community” and what “our wonderful selves” as the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus said in his commentaries about the dismal musical selections for the Papal Mass at Nationals Stadium.

Simcha seems to trivialize ugliness, pretty much condoning it. I find that problematic.

Posted by Julie on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 1:38 PM (EDT):

@Michelle, I think having eight young children may have something to do with Simcha’s inability to take time to respond to comments ;)

Posted by Mrs McG on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 1:36 PM (EDT):

In reading some of these comments, I can’t help but feel a little frustrated when people write about “ugly liturgy” as though aesthetics are simply personal preferences for worship. Beauty exists in the objective sense; it is not merely in the ear/eye of the beholder. Moreover, beauty in the liturgy is not PRIMARILY for our edification, but to give glory to God. Worship is not about *you*. Some people very honestly feel bothered by “ugly liturgy” not just because they personally “don’t like” certain music or certain art, but because the music and the art and the banality introduced into the “conversation of the liturgy” is unfitting for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. There is a wide range of what constitutes acceptability for the liturgy to suit many different tastes—but this in not what is going on in most Novus Ordo liturgies.

Posted by Rob m on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 1:26 PM (EDT):

Although I may complain about things I don’t like about a particular celebration of Mass, church music, or the church decor, these things are secondary. I recognize there’s a certain self-centeredness about such complaints, however valid. I must focus on the primary reason I’m there.
It’s not all about me and my preferences.

Posted by Michelle on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 1:26 PM (EDT):

Kahili, I think you are missing the point. It seems that Simcha does seem to extol ugliness in liturgy. I certainly hope that is not the case.

For your information, Msgr. Guido Marini is the Master of Ceremonies for none other than Pope Benedict XVI himself. What he wrote is an extension of what the Holy Father has said and written before and and after he became Pope.

Beauty in liturgy is important. For you to bring up Fr. Damien into this discussion is to miss the point. Granted, Fr. Damien had to work with what he had and he still managed to make the best of it. Many, if not most, parishes here in the United States are not in such bad situations that they could not at least make an effort at improving the Mass and infusing the Holy Sacrifice with solemnity, dignity and majesty.

I am wondering why the blogger has not taken the time to respond to valid criticisms.

Posted by AT on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 1:14 PM (EDT):

Simcha Fisher’s writing is my favorite thing on the Internet, and I’m delighted to see her blogging here.

Posted by James K on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 1:08 PM (EDT):

Thanks, Athol, for the encouraging words. I hope that I can focus better on beauty of Jesus in Word and Sacrament but I am struggling with my limitations. Fortunately I can often attend Mass during the week and receive the peace and communion I desire with a small but vibrant Catholic community.

Posted by Father Lankeit on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 11:31 AM (EDT):

An excellent reflection on humility. God bless you!

Posted by csl on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 10:32 AM (EDT):

Uncle Screwtape says it best, “If a man can’t be cured of churchgoing, the next best thing is to send him all over the neighbourhood looking for the church that “suits” him until he becomes a taster or connoisseur of churches…the search for a “suitable” church makes the man a critic where the Enemy wants him to be a pupil.”

Posted by Athol on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 9:36 AM (EDT):

Dear James K I can sympathise with you about going from vibrant masses in the US to rather dull ones in Australia. I attended some fantastic masses in the US in 2007,2008 and 2009 and it did seem flat to attend the Australian masses after that- but I just focused on Jesus in the Eucharist and accepted the limitations of the people I was with. Not every parish had musicians for one- our parish struggles to even get anyone to do the music at some of the weekend masses- so not matter how lacking in talent I am thankful when anyone volunteers to do it. I thought the singing was bad in Australia until I went to Mass in Ireland-where most of the people don’t sing- only the priest and a handful of others. I asked why- and was told that the Irish Catholics thought singing hymns was a Protestant thing-and they weren’t in to it. I must say I do miss the vigorous singing in the Anglican Churches I attended when I was young- everybody sings unlike in the Catholic parishes where many don’t sing and even then they sing very softly.

Posted by Renee on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 9:05 AM (EDT):

@ Claire - what a wonderful story. Simcha, would you say, then, that if you can find a beautiful Mass, then go for it. But if not, don’t add to the woe by being judgmental and ugly within?

Posted by James K on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 6:46 AM (EDT):

I appreciate Simcha’s good humour and wise advice but the reality for me is that the Mass as celebrated here in Australia is utterly void of feeling for me. The lack of decent music, reverence for God and enthusiasm for His Word leave me depressed. I so miss the beautiful Masses I received back in the US. When I last visited, I was in heaven at the choir Mass. I love the solitude and calm of the daily Mass as well. Something is missing here. I hope I can find a way to see through to the Real Presence and Love that is before me. It’s very difficult.

Posted by Gregory on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 5:45 AM (EDT):

And where would you draw the line? (ok, the truly shocking link is not to Mass - but you’ll see my point; and there are four equally hideous parts to this linked series if you can handle them).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4UdB4y0h0o&feature=related

I take your point, Simcha. But as much pure nard as is available should be used for Christ every time.

Posted by Corrie on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 5:13 AM (EDT):

I love this passage by C.S. Lewis. It meant a lot to me in my “church shopping” days.
{When I first became a Christian . . . I thought that I could do it on my own, by retiring to my rooms and reading theology, and wouldn’t go to the churches and Gospel Halls . . . I disliked very much their hymns which I considered to be fifth-rate poems set to sixth-rate music. But as I went on I saw the merit of it. I came up against different people of quite different outlooks and different education, and then gradually my conceit just began peeling off. I realized that the hymns (which were just sixth-rate music) were, nevertheless, being sung with devotion and benefit by an old saint in elastic-side boots in the opposite pew, and then you realize that you aren’t fit to clean those boots. It gets you out of your solitary conceit. (God in the Dock, pp. 61-62}

Posted by Kahili on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 5:00 AM (EDT):

Michelle, with respect, I think you’re way missing the point. The blogger wasn’t saying that we shouldn’t have beautiful liturgy, (or work to improve what we have). She was saying that we should take advantage of the merits that come from things that aren’t just to our liking, that aren’t perfect or beautiful.

The saints aren’t canonized for their ability to bend everything to their personal preferences or standards or to establish perfect liturgies, and I’m pretty sure none of them read Msgr Whats-His-Name’s Book. The saints are saints because they managed to make holy what they had where they were. Think Fr, Damien making holy a leper colony or Mother Theresa making holy the slums of Calcutta.

As a wise priest once said, the mass isn’t a personal devotion that needs be done to our liking.

Posted by Michelle T. on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 4:51 AM (EDT):

Way to go, Simcha! Your article struck some good chords in me. Thank you for the reminder to keep my eyes on Christ. : )

Posted by Michelle on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 4:36 AM (EDT):

I re-read the piece, but, I am still not convinced by the blogger. I would challenge her to read Msgr. Marini’s book. We can do a lot better than ugly. The sad thing is that we have forgotten what solemnity, beauty and majesty are.

Many of us have to suffer through bad music from OCP. I sometimes wish that we could have a bonfire and get rid of all of the tripe. I went to Mass in Houston last month and experienced one of the most beautiful liturgies ever. This was a low EF Mass and there were only five of us. It was spur of the moment.

A week later, I was back home, suffering through guitars and Spirit and Song. What the blogger seems to forget is that we pray as we believe. We need to make some effort at rendering to God the best that He deserves. Sadly, many of our churches down here don’t even look like churches. One looks like a funeral home and about three look like half a moon. The music in most of our parishes is quite sub-standard. The Catherdal features Mariachis at its main Mass.

To paraphrase Flannery O’ Connor, sometimes we suffer more from the Church than for the Church.

I do hope that Simcha’s initial blog post is not the shape of things to come. I would have expected something of a higher caliber from the National Catholic Register and not something that looks like it could have come from the other NCR.

Posted by Julie on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 3:47 AM (EDT):

Here’s a new one: I’ve learned to offer up the ugly…it’s not always *that* ugly, but our liturgies are worlds away from what I’m accustomed to, and it took me about three years in our new parish before I wasn’t completely distracted at every Mass. So, it’s different. Cool—I can handle it now, sitting in the pew. My problem is that people have found out that I served in music ministry at my home parish (over 15 years in an amazing, reverent music ministry) and I’m feeling a ton of pressure to do so in our current parish.

Honestly, when I seriously entertain the idea, I feel near a panic attack. It literally makes me cry—perhaps I’m still grieving the loss of the ministry and the liturgy that brought me so beautifully into God’s presence every week. I don’t think I could get up and perpetuate the status quo, but I also don’t feel as though it’s my place to walk into an ensemble and start telling people what to do.

So sad—I miss music ministry so much, yet I feel not one iota of affinity for the music ministry at my parish. Sigh.

Posted by dietrich on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 3:24 AM (EDT):

When I attend an ugly N.O. with all of the irreverence and sacrilege, I am, in a certain sense, reminded of the passion of Joan of Arc. She refused to deny Him so that she might receive Him.

Should the liturgy draw us out of our ordinary lives and into the supernatural, or should it drag God down into our ordinary lives?

The over-emphasis of the community of the faithful thrusts the main theme of the holy Mass - the re-enactment of the sacrifice of Calvary, by which God is unspeakably glorified - into the background. One forgets that the glorification of God is the center of the holy Mass, and that each individual, together with all the other faithful, has the PRIVILEGE of participating in this glorification which the priest as representative of Christ carries out. The earlier practice of the priest facing the altar was a deep expression of this: the faithful looked with the priest toward the altar, and they were drawn by him into the mystery of the sacrifice. This was a deep Christ-centered gesture: the priest, who represents Christ, was shown to be that mediator at Mass whom we follow - and he as himself completely directed to God.

This holy community with others - or at least the consciousness of community - at the sacred meal, a community which is radically different from all natural communities, can never be achieved when the true hierarchy of things is upset. This is the true hierarchy: first, the glorification of God, where we are directed exclusively to God in adoration, then the intimate union of love with Jesus in Holy Communion, and finally the triumphant unity with all the faithful who are present, as well as with the entire Church. As soon as one aims for the unity of the faithful directly and ignores this sacred hierarchy, one loses the unity and replaces it, a least subjectively, with a profane unity, such as we might find in an association of union workers. Blindness to the sacred as well as secularization go hand in hand with an overemphasis on the collective, with the triumph of collectivism.

Posted by Anna on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 2:26 AM (EDT):

To Charlotte(Matilda): who could possibly think Cistercian is ugly??? I used to go there all the time for daily Mass when I was at UD. I think that abbey is the example par excellance for the fact that “beautiful” does not have to equal ornate and baroque (not that I’m anti-baroque), nor does “simple” have to mean “wretchedly ugly” as it seems to in many local parishes (I’m not in Dallas anymore).

Posted by Maria on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 2:25 AM (EDT):

Yes! I’ve been thinnking and saying similar things for a while, though not so articulately. Ugly will find us where ever we are. We don’t have to embrace it, but can stand it. I’ve said the exact same thing as you, “If Jesus can stand it, then so can I.”
God can and does work his miracle in just the same way at every Mass.

Posted by Devra on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 1:50 AM (EDT):

I did get a little bit of insight once into why some ugly masses are the way they are, when I was roped into organizing a First Communion Mass for some kids I had been teaching. We had a volunteer who could play the guitar, badly, and no volunteers who could play anything else at all. Plus he was a relative of one of the kids. The parents and kids had strong sentimental attachments to some truly awful, though not strictly heretical, pieces of music, so we sang those. And lots of similar things. I didn’t have the time to make other arrangements or the courage or inclination to make a scene.

Posted by Michael on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 12:11 AM (EDT):

I attend Tridentine Mass every Sunday, not because it makes me feel superior, but because I draw more from this Liturgy. That of course does not mean that there is something wrong with Novus Ordo, just that it doesn’t work for me. That’s what we can not forget in our modern world. That different people are drawn to different things, and when it comes to the Liturgy of the Church, there are many options for a reason. Personally I would like to see the Church educate better about what the Tridentine Mass is, because a large number of people have opinions that are quite askew.

This was an amazing article, and it talks about something we should all take sometime to pray on!

Posted by Rose Nigel on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 11:49 PM (EDT):

Corrie - I LOVE your story. I have such a soft spot for the “uglies” with heart (though I’d say “ugly” is a big, big misnomer). E.g., there’s a big kid in our parish who I have to sit behind whenever I see him. He can’t sing on key, but boy does he sing! The fervor, effort, and total lack of self-consciousness is humbling…and inspiring.

Posted by Marla on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 10:44 PM (EDT):

This is very cool!

Posted by Corrie on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 10:42 PM (EDT):

From a different perspective: As a convert, many of the things that cause cradle Catholics to cringe are beautiful to me and my family. Coming from a largely Evangelical/Pentecostal background we got to worship in large warehouses or storefronts with nary a symbol of Christ to be had. Praise God for burlap banners! We recently worshipped in a small Catholic parish in a tiny town and they had a keyboard, banjo, mandolin, string bass, bassoon and several guitars. I was moved to tears because they were playing their hearts out for the Lord with the instrumentalists/vocalists that were available in their parish. No, it wasn’t perfect (I’m a classically trained musician), but it was lovely and worship was fitting. To tell you the truth, I’m scared to even ever go to a “reverent” Catholic mass for fear that my family of young children will disturb someone else’s worship experience. I would rather worship “ugly” and feel welcome to come again than worship “reverent” and feel pressured to leave. I remember that Jesus had compassion on the “ugly” and the outcast.

Posted by Claire on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 10:07 PM (EDT):

I get it, Simcha, and I’ve never heard it put better.

I’m a Trad fan. One time some years back, I was in an unlovely church. I was idly turning up my nose at how very round and brown the church was and how truly dumb the music was. And then I saw the big, heavy, slow kid bring up the gifts. And the priest smiled and said something kind, and the kid turned go back to his seat—and man, that kid let loose a grin that lit up that whole church. He had done his job, and done it well. He just beamed.

It was a little bit of the Kingdom right there. It was—exquisite. I’ll never forget it.

I never know when God’s going to teach me a lesson!

Posted by Tongxin Lu on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 9:22 PM (EDT):

Thank you for your humor and insight. I totally can relate to this. After spending a month going to St. Michael’s Abbey or the sisters’ the cloistered convent in CA everyday, I came back to my parish church in upstate NY. I cried unceasingly during the first mass and didn’t know what to do. You are right, we can learn from casual masses and it’s still Christ’s real presence. Jesus, meek and humble of heart, make my heart like yours.

Posted by Chris on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 9:10 PM (EDT):

Thank you, Ms. Fischer. Our family splits time between a couple of modern mass settings and a NewRite Latin mass once a month. We get to see judgmentalism from both directions!

Posted by Aly B on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 8:52 PM (EDT):

I normally don’t really have a strong opinion on these things. I converted to Catholicism a couple years ago, and at the time I attended a parish that many might describe as too progressive. I don’t think that the people who attended there were irreverent in any way, though, just as an aside…or at least not any more so than average. I get that none of us are as reverent as we should be.

However, I must say this article kind of made me go, “...huh.” I like that it tries to make something positive out of a clear negative, but other than that, I don’t think it has much to stand on.

As other posters have pointed out, just because we need to avoid pride and judging, doesn’t mean that what goes on at many Masses is “okay” and should just be accepted. Honestly, I am not the most knowledgable on what the liturgy should be. I feel as if I have been blessed enough to attend parishes where very few liturgical abuses occur, but who knows, maybe they do occur and I just don’t recognize them as such. I have heard many others talk about some pretty serious abuses occuring at their parishes, though. And I don’t think the right response is to just connect with the “ugliness” there and pretend it might really be a good thing.

It isn’t about aesthetics and it isn’t about ordinary vs extraordinary, or east vs west. It’s about reverence and awe and adoration of our beautiful God. And quite frankly, if the Mass is so distorted that it becomes an obstacle to our communion with God, then I think we as a people have a right to be angry—there is such a thing as righteous anger, and I can’t think of a more appropriate time to be angry than when we, or those around us, are not treating God and His dwelling place with the utmost respect.

I don’t “personally” have a problem with guitars. I actually really don’t like organs or chanting. I like attending Mass in English because despite my best efforts I get lost when I attend the Mass in Latin and cease “feeling” like I am participating, which isn’t really a problem at the English Mass. But do my preferences matter? Part of me believes they do, in some small way, matter… but I accept that when it comes down to it, if Holy Mother Church says such-and-such is an abuse, it doesn’t matter how much I might prefer that way of doing things. And if Holy Mother Church says such-and-such is NOT an abuse, then it doesn’t matter how much I dislike that way of doing things, and I need to remind myself to get off my high horse and quit being stricter than the Church.

For the “Too Long, Didn’t Read” people that skipped all that:

To sum up, I think there is enough ugliness in the world that we don’t need any additional reminders at the place where Saints speak of going for refuge, for nourishment, for recooperating from the “outside world.” We should not let ourselves get judgemental, but neither should we accept abuses as if they aren’t a big deal. We wouldn’t accept any kind of abuse in our “worldly” homes, even after acknowledging we are imperfect and lowly sinners, we would still work to stop the abuse. Our Church home, in my opinion, should be treated with the same care, if not more.

Final note: Just because God doesn’t snap His Holy fingers and make bad things in the world end, doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be concerned with working diligently to end such things. Examples would be any and all sins and negligences. So I don’t think that bit about waiting for a divine wind from the Holy Spirit is an acceptable excuse for doing nothing to try to end the abuses at Masses…and I am just as guilty of apathy in this area as anyone else… ok, I’ve gone on long enough. God bless everyone.

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 8:39 PM (EDT):

Why is your “beautiful” everybody’s beautiful?

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 7:41 PM (EDT):

I agree with Naomi. Some of us can’t get to an aesthetically pleasing mass. How about a ride???

After Mass—which I frequent less and less often, I usually say to myself, “Thank God that’s over with!” I’d rather watch it on EWTN.

It’s enough to make me leave the church (well, there are other issues, too… too personal to go into).

I am also sick a lot, and my parish priest won’t give me a decent Eucharistic minister: the parish is too busy doing “good” to others.

A lot of us are just plain left out, period.

Great article, Ms. Fischer!

Posted by Chris on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 7:37 PM (EDT):

Hello!

I agree with your perspective… although, it causes me to wonder whether or not that is a selfish take on the objective situation. What about those who have to attend the “ugly Mass” because there is nothing else as an alternative? Though it’s easy for us to find a good of a bad situation when it is temporary, it seems that that is not a good enough reason to hurt a whole congregation for years and years on end, who may not know anything of what the Mass should be.

In my experience of these sorts of Masses, I have left only feeling badly for those who have had no other experience of the Faith than this, and prayed for the conversions necessary to bring about something more worthy of being called the Mass.

Posted by Nina on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 7:34 PM (EDT):

Simcha, I really enjoyed this. I often say similar things to myself, my children, some friends and family…. JESUS IS HERE. And that is why we are here. It isn’t about ME. Etc., etc., etc. Yes. And I think your best point was in a response to a commenter: that it is not ideal, but when we can not change it and God seems to be allowing it, we must adjust *ourselves* with a proper spirit and attitude of humility, not be angry or rebellious, frustrated, or even…..yikes, disgusted. It is HIS Mass—-not ours—- and the state where and in which He is allowing (many of? most of?) His churches to exist in. We don’t *need* to understand it.

Having said that, for almost 15 years my family has had the great blessing of being part of a Traditional Latin Mass community (still occassionally attending the OF for this reason or that, like vacations). When we decided a couple of years ago to put some of our children in our local Catholic school, we became more regularly “bi-rite”, by necessity. :) And up to the time before “discovering” the older rite, both my husband and I were only OF (in fact, in my case, liturgical dancing, rock bands, etc—-which I loved ;) ).

I’ve lived both sides of the EF vs. OF—- experienced it all (being too liberal for some/too conservative for others), and bottom line: My heart still belongs to the Latin Mass! The beauty of the Mass, yes—-AND the community, the sheep who gather there.

I fear there is a sort of backlash starting amongst many of the most faithful orthodox Catholics against the “Traditionalists” and I don’t quite understand it. In my opinion, there is no such thing: we are all pursuing the Truth that is the Catholic Faith, the true, the good, the beautiful. We all long for a Shepherd who feeds his flock. We are on the same side and must build one another up. We can stick together, have each other’s backs, and still have different tastes. But, in fairness, one can’t deny that—- as one of my youngest children commented once—-the two Masses DO sometimes seem like two different religions. Our answer to this confusion was simply that the Church is One, but has different rites, that appear very, very different, but that we are unified under the Holy Father…and CAN be different. But it is still sometimes disconcerting to the heart, I suppose especially to the weak, who are more affected by the “ugliness”?

Truly, though, I want to say this: from the bottom of my heart, some of the BEST people and families and priests I have ever been honored to meet and know are in our local FSSP Latin Mass parish. My children have the kind of friendships I never had as a child, know the kind of families I never knew. GOOD people——-no, GREAT people. Truly heroic people, making difficult counter-cultural decisions, walking the talk in the most difficult circumstances,——and in turn, providing inspiration and support for those struggling along the Catholic narrow road to persevere. People like me. ;)

Perhaps some are frustrated because they haven’t found this in their local OF parishes, that there seems to be a want of large families, for instance, or sermons that reflect the realities and challenges of modern Catholics and Catholic families, and the direction they need. I just wanted to give my personal perspective that seems to be different from many commenters that have found (or fear) that the Traditional Mass community is somehow threatening or even malnourishing—- that in its Beauty, I have been and am truly fed, strengthened; and after journeying around, feeling worn out——ultimately, where I feel like I am home. And it is not just because of the external beauty. :) It is how it has transformed the interior hearts and lives of those graced with it.

Posted by Nicole on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 7:31 PM (EDT):

I liked this blog, although I am guilty of switching parishes for a more comfortable, newer one after 12 years at one that is 100 years old and badly in need of renovation/ demolition! Truthfully, though, it was more about the community that we had gotten to know at this new parish that made us feel more at home. I agree that “Christ is here. If He can stand it, then so can I.” We have six children, though, and I do consider what their connection to the church (I’m not just talking about the building) must be like. The famillies at this new parish are people we pray the rosary with monthly at different families’ homes. We never had that kind of experience at our former parish, for various reasons. I want my children to grow up Catholic, and I am praying they will remain Catholic as a result of their relationship with Jesus primarily, but also from the love and prayerful support they receive from their new parish family.

Posted by Jennifer Flippen on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 7:24 PM (EDT):

Very good piece, Simcha. Thanks so much for writing it. Some here have posted emphatically that they would rather attend a “beautiful mass” than an ugly one. Sure - so would I. However, what if the “ugly mass” was all you had? For one reason or another - car broke down, very bad weather - you could not attend the mass of your choice. Would you go? Would you go to the “ugly” mass? Or, would you consider it an indignity not to be born. If this is your attitude - I am afraid to say - you are suffering from pride - pride big time. This is the devil’s trick to put yourself before Our Lord. Sure - you don’t THINK you are. You are honoring Him by not going to a mass you feel degrades Him. But - you are very much disrespecting Him and really throwing His sacrifice back in His face. Do you think ANYTHING is REALLY “good” enough for the God who created the sun and the infinite universe??? The only thing good enough is true humility - ie - “I am pretty pathetic without you, dearest Jesus - help me - PLEEEEAAASE help me”. This statement is for every one of us. In all charity - don’t be tricked by the devil. He is a lot smarter than any theologian or priest including you. We really do need to approach the kingdom of heaven as little children because otherwise we don’t trust Our Lord. There is so much more I could say - but I will stop here. I will pray for you.

Posted by cameron sark on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 7:12 PM (EDT):

It is right and just that we not mistake the beauty of holiness for the holiness of beauty. Thank you for reminding me that the mass I sat through on Saturday afternoon, an aesthetic disaster, was nonetheless a spiritual miracle.

Posted by Rachel on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 6:39 PM (EDT):

I agree! Good point! Now…how to rid the heart from even the thoughts of self-righteousness? Join the folk band? Be on the decorating committee? Hug the leper?

Posted by Pam on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 6:03 PM (EDT):

@Michelle—I think you may be proving Simcha’s point. No one is advocating for bad liturgy. No one is advocating INauthentic liturgy. However, not all parishes are created equally. Perhaps you are fortunate to be in a parish where the liturgy is always beautiful, reverent and fulfilling for you. Not everyone is so lucky. If, however, there is nothing otherwise invalid or illicit, then it behooves us to praise God, worship Him in the Holy Sacrament of the Altar—and quit complaining quite so much. I think you also fail to acknowledge the reality that beauty is in the eye of the beholder. On the other hand, it’s up to the Church to define orthodoxy. :)

Posted by Maria on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 6:01 PM (EDT):

Fabulous article!

Posted by cdw on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 5:33 PM (EDT):

@Jeanne Marie & Pam - the music liturgical ministers complement the Mass, whether they are “contemporary”, “happy-clappy”, traditional, or otherwise. I find myself (having been merged from one parish to another a year ago) going from the “contemporary” choir status, to a mixture of all of the above; it’s a challenge on the keyboard. I like to convey to the congregation through our selections, a connection to the readings at Mass, to try to put them in the proper frame of mind going into Mass, and also during Mass. I have a guitarist part-time, so when he’s with us, it’s a little more upbeat, but he has also learned some of the more traditional music from me. However, I digress; our church has enough selection in Masses and music liturgical ministers, to appeal to almost everyone in the parish family, so if one “style” of Mass and its music doesn’t help in their prayerful frame of mind, another most certainly will.

Posted by Michelle on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 5:10 PM (EDT):

It seems to me that maybe the blogger should read Msgr. Guido Marin’s new book on the liturgy wherein he talks about beauty, as well as Sacramentum Caritatis and even Liturgiam Authenticam.

I certainly hope that this initial blog post is not the sign of things to come. I expected better from the National Catholic Register.

Posted by THERESE60640 on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 4:58 PM (EDT):

Welcome to the blogs here! Great, thought-provoking article, as are the comments. I would guess that I have “offered it up” when it comes to the inane, “ugly” liturgies for at least several years’ worth of Sunday masses. You are right, we are all doing our best to worship God and it is helpful to remind ourselves of that fact.
But as several of your commentors have pointed out, our children are getting this as their primary experience of The Sacrifice of the Mass - shouldn’t we have a little awe and majesty as we focus on Him? Our liturgy director actually closed his pre-mass comments with “Enjoy the liturgy!”

Posted by Blog Goliard on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 4:53 PM (EDT):

@Thomas Kuna-Jacob, BSFS, MA: I’m not sure if you’re arguing that playing fast and loose with the liturgy is *superior* to doing it by the book, or if you just believe it’s a matter of indifference. Either way, I disagree. Ours is a liturgical Church. “Do your best, and God will supply what is lacking” is a Catholic attitude. “It’s all good” isn’t.
.
P.S. When I lived in Birmingham, I attended Mass at EWTN many times. I can understand how it would not be to everyone’s taste. But not all that is quiet is “dead”. In fact, turning down the noise and the overt participation, eliminating some of the floor show, even shifting more of the words out of a language we can inattentively understand without listening to—all this can open up new space for an active, attentive, prayerful participation. Especially when you’re not forever having to get up and hold hands, perform the Holy Handshake, et cetera.
.
I’d argue, in fact, that this sort of thing is exactly what many of us moderns most need. Our modern world is ever so busy and noisy and full of distraction. What you see as “dead” is not dead at all, but a contemplative antidote to so much of the bustle outside. (Remember, these Masses are being offered by a religious house.)

Posted by Rose Nigel on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 4:43 PM (EDT):

Great stuff! Our parish has a “contemporary band” (is that what you call it?) at the youth mass and I….like it. I know what some of the commenters are saying about the self-glorifying, just plain awful tambourine masses. But I also have to say that you CAN do contemporary stuff in a way that is well played, moving, and reverent. I’ve seen it. You can also ruin a perfectly lovely Tridentine mass when you whisper venom about the priest post-communion (seen that plenty too). Simcha, thanks for reminding us to get over ourselves and remember Who we’re there for.

Posted by Barbara C. on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 4:42 PM (EDT):

There is a certain snobbiness I’ve seen where some traditionalists act like the NO can only be “ugly”, and they totally discount that the Church keeps it as the primary Mass form for a reason. The one thing the TLM has going for it is it have very little wiggle-room…it has a very specific structure. And as Simcha pointed out there is a difference between “ugliness” and “heresy”...ugliness can truly be in the eye of the beholder. The ethnic culture of each parish can greatly determine the type of music for instance. And each priest brings his own gifts and his own problems. One of our priests probably seems more reverent because he is more quiet and laid back while the other one just naturally exudes enthusiasm (a word that is rooted in having the presence of God inside).

Ms. Fisher, welcome to the blogosphere of the National Catholic Register! May you grow in holiness through this blogosphere, and may God bless you abundantly.

In response to the article, I would say that one of the hardest things to do, at least for us young whippersnappers, is to be able to identify liturgical abuse and try to correct it when we encounter it. When the ugliness we encounter is not liturgical abuse, even if we are uncomfortable with it, we should accept it as part of the liturgy. On the other hand, we should always try to correct any liturgical abuse we encounter, and we will certainly be reminded of our own imperfections when we try to correct the abuse.

I apologize if this has already been addressed. I did not read all the comments.

Athol’s post is the best of all of the many other sometimes contentious posts. We have two priests and two parishes in our town. One says the Mass strictly correctly, but generally rattles it off as if by rote; the other does a lot of ad lib, even up to the moment of the consecration, but the latter one really gives the Mass slowly and with much devotion and sentiment of its link to heaven and the life after death. The latter converts 20-30 new Catholics a year in the RCIA; the former, the church is nearly empty. Athol is right: the style of the Mass is almost immaterial; the essence is the Real Presence and the reverence devoted to Christ’s Presence. I’d rather attend a real Mass at the latter’s Church (and would everyday if I could), but I can barely stand EWTN’s radio broadcast Novus Ordo in Latin, where even the Our Father is said in Latin, but the Consecration in English. While the homilists are usually quite good, what a dead service that EWTN mass is—the people don’t even sing. But it’s still a real Mass—for them who are present, but not for me listening vicariously. A Radio or TV Mass, even one in the Tridentine, does not fulfill one’s desire to receive the Lord, whereas personal attendance, even at a “happy-clappy” Mass, does.

Posted by Naomi Young on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 4:19 PM (EDT):

You know, those of you who have voted with your feet (or your cars) to go to a more reverent Mass: Have you offered a ride to those of us who don’t drive? Nice that YOU can escape… Fortunately, my current parish is reasonable. But I have lived and worked in places where I had NO CHOICE but to stick it out.

Just saying… maybe those left behind (if you’ll pardon the expression) need some help, too.

Posted by Gina Nakagawa on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 4:19 PM (EDT):

Very thought provoking and thoughtful. This is so spot on. But isn’t it just because we are so imperfect and foolish that we need beauty to surround us and drag us, perhaps kicking and screaming to God?

Posted by to Anonymous on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:59 PM (EDT):

No, you’re wrong. That passage had to do with injustice, greed and indulging in profit-making at the Temple.

Posted by Blog Goliard on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:57 PM (EDT):

@Pam: Thanks for the enlightenment…and for contributing your talents. (They certainly outweigh my talents. Nice expression at the keyboard once I got the tune down; but never could sight-read to save my life.)

@Mrs McG: What I think you’re pointing to is the need for give-and-take. I’ve always bristled at the message to lie back and think of England, or to learn to stop worrying and love Marty Haugen, because any distraction or irritation or difficulty in reaching the prayerful place I need to be at Mass is my problem and mine alone.

Those of us who are driven crazy by bad taste—or who just have tastes very different from our local liturgical czars—do have a responsibility to do our best to not let it distract us from the truly miraculous, life-giving thing that happens at the altar at every Mass. If you’re lucky enough to have a Mass near you every week, that’s easy enough to get to and involves no physical danger, bitterness is uncalled for and unattractive.

But on the other hand, those people driving us crazy have a responsibility of their own to be sensitive to the people they are making uncomfortable (or worse). Their job is not to just carry on heedlessly tormenting people, telling us that if we’re really Catholics we should just suck it up and enjoy our gruel. No, their job is to…well, let me put it this way. Their job is to pretend that us cranky trads are in fact hypersensitive Boomers telling them that wooden confessionals and too much Latin and organs are a real downers and tempt us to just leave for the local Episcopal church; and then to deal with us with the same sensitivity and responsiveness they would bring to that situation.

Posted by Athol on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:51 PM (EDT):

Great post Simcha. The Mass is the Mass is the Mass. As long as it is a valid Mass then I focus on Jesus in the Eucharist. The outward decor or singing is nice when it is beautiful but not the most important thing. I am sure the Mass celebrated by the Catholic priests in the Nazi camps had ugly decor but I’d swap all the beautiful masses i’ve attended to go to one of St Maximillian Kolbe’s or the other priests who entered into the mass in a unique way as living crucifixes of suffering.

Posted by Mrs McG on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:41 PM (EDT):

“A little ugliness is good for us, folks. Taken in the proper doses in the right context, a little bad taste is something we need, because it tells us something about ourselves.”

I don’t think this sentiment can be applied universally. It is true that sometimes we have to “offer up” the pains and abuses we see at some Masses and suffer with Christ as He suffered at Calvary. That’s easier to type than to do when the tamborines are shaking. For me personally, an ugly liturgy is a near occasion of sin—my pride rears up in a liturgy like that nowhere else. “Lord, I think Thee than I am not like the rest of these ignorant, Cafeteria Catholics.”

It is the transcendent and the beautiful which makes me feel the state of my soul. I see how far removed and unworthy I am of the things of God, much less of the Almighty Himself.

I’m not saying my disposition is holier than Simcha’s—just that my experience is the inverse of hers and may be for others as well.

Posted by Melanie Bettinelli on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:39 PM (EDT):

Simcha, Brava! Well said!!!

Posted by Pam on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:33 PM (EDT):

@ Blog Goliard—I know exactly what you’re describing. Guitar can be an extremely difficult instrument to play, and it can be an easily-picked-up-and-learned instrument. The difference is between Segovia and strumma-strumma. You usually hear strumma-strumma (and to be honest, that’s how I play! Any self-deprecation in this or other posts is totally in good humor!) because the guitarist is hitting the chords only, and not individual notes. Talented guitarists can successfully accompany a group of singers, and other instruments, while also playing the melody, usually with an underlying arpeggio. Hacks like me can’t (at least not without weeks and weeks of practice—for just one song or hymn!) So instead of moving the fingers of both left and right hands in intricate and beautiful patterns that create a Segovia-like sound, my left hand moves to a set pattern, the chord, while my right hand strumma-strummas. It’s definitely inelegant, I’ll grant you that. But it’s safe, almost error-proof, and if enough people sing along, it gets drowned out. It really is much better with a pianist. But—an organ is better still. Organs provide a sure melody with good supporting harmony and chord movement, and is much more reassuring to a congregation hesitant to sing otherwise. (OTOH, organs can go to the other extreme, being so very loud that the congregation searches pockets and purses frantically for ear plugs.)

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:19 PM (EDT):

Kind of like Christ, when he saw people doing inappropriate things in the sanctuary. Did he say, “You can’t do this!” and make a whip of cords and start driving people out? Or did he sit back and say, “This stuff is offensive to God, and flies in the face of his explicit injunctions to us as to what this place is for”?

Wait…

Posted by Father Robert Behnke on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:18 PM (EDT):

I believe Denise hit the nail on its head: ugliness is not good enough unless its all we have. I have often been appalled and even scandalized when, over my nearly 38 years in Christ’s priesthood, parishioners have shared with me stories of “ugliness” in Sunday Masses which they, for whatever reason, have had need to attend - Masses both near and far. There has always been one common theme to their stories - “Father, I am so glad to be back here….” Ugliness has nothing to do with small or great financial resources, or Mass offered whether at the altar of a stunning gothic cathedral, in a small wooden chapel, or on the hood of a jeep in wartime. Ugliness has to do with attitude: is this all about me, or is it all about Our Lord and His Church.

Posted by Michael on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:14 PM (EDT):

Thanks a lot for this reminder. I am in RCIA now and one factor in my conversion was experiencing the beauty of some Catholic worship communities and liturgy. But, this is a good balance to remember beauty cannot be the ONLY thing that leads us closer to Christ. As Christ himself came in an ordinary human body and did not show any special physical beauty. Though for those who stayed and listened to him, they saw how beautiful he really was!

Posted by Tom on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:08 PM (EDT):

I agree that the Mass transcends all the human foibles we experience or even initiate at the various liturgies we attend. Yet, it is still the Mass and we should only feel gratitude to the priest who has offered his life and many other realities to be of service to the Eucharist and the people of God. Our priest deserve our loving support and humble gratitude. This article starts with a very hard swipe at priests.

Posted by Blog Goliard on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:03 PM (EDT):

@Pam: Glad to read your additional comments on instruments. And perhaps, as a guitarist, you can help me better describe what I’ve been getting at in complaining about “strumma-strumma” guitars at Mass.</br>
</br>
At least to my untrained ears (all I ever learned to play was the piano), I hear something very different than the playing of a tune with much “folk” guitar. It’s more of a rhythmic tuneless strumming, always strumma-strumma-strumma, that is like the evil opposite of what, say, Segovia did.</br>
</br>
Now I know that classical guitar is not the only valid style; but I also suspect that if it’s merely serving as a relentless, droning, rhythm instrument you’re probably doing it wrong, no matter the intended style. Am I making any sense here; and if so, how would one describe it all in a more musically-literate way?

Posted by Devra on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:03 PM (EDT):

Simcha Fisher is the only author I know who is this original, this hilarious, this balanced, and addresses topics at once this profound and this practical. I am really delighted to see that she’s now writing for the Register and look forward to reading all her future contributions.

Posted by Pam on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 2:56 PM (EDT):

I feel compelled to add to all of this: I play guitar. I even play it at Mass. I’d play organ, but I would hurt people if I did. So, I play guitar. The problem with many (but not all) guitar Masses is that the musicians think they are limited to the stuff in “Glory & Praise.” First of all: some of the stuff in G&P is profoundly beautiful and scripturally outstanding. It doesn’t all deserve the dissing it often gets. But secondly: it is possible to play the old hymns on guitar. During Christmas, I like to play, “Of the Father’s Love Begotten.” On guitar. Thirdly: many parishes are… blessed? stuck? with OCP books. People: there is good stuff in there. There’s horrifying dreck, too. Please God spare me the paganistic “Lord of the Dance” this Lent! “O Sacred Head Surrounded” can be utterly reverent and beautiful, even, yes, on guitar.

It’s less the instruments used, and more the reverence, and the effort to worship God Almighty.

Posted by Reggie on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 2:48 PM (EDT):

To Miguel: She is not talking about Mass per se, it seems to me, but bout the experience we have when we go to Mass. Your second to last sentence rounds out piece nicely.

To Simcha: I’m glad my wife left this page up, I might have missed your great thought here. Some times as Catholics, we forget that we truly, in ourselves, are not worthy. The gift of the Mass is a gift beyond our worthiness. We do forget that from time to time. I like the notion that sitting in the midst of ugliness can remind us of what we are without the Grace of Him whom we are to receive.

Thanks, Simcha!

Posted by Tiffany on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 2:44 PM (EDT):

Excellent, Simcha! I remember a priest once giving a wonderful homily around the statement, “You’re not as bad as you fear, but you’re not as good as you think.” It’s good to be reminded of both, and you’ve done that very well. Your writing style made it a joy to read.

This is an important point which I am glad you clarified. You also said, “A little ugliness is good for us, folks. Taken in the proper doses in the right context…” and I think that is an important thing to point out. We went to an “ugly” Mass for a while, one that was not very reverent, not very Christ focused and it started to feel like we were being spiritually starved. Yes, we were being fed the True Body and Blood of Christ, but we wanted the support of the community and the liturgy, too. We wanted some quiet time to reverently reflect on this great gift of Christ Himself. We wanted to hear the poetry of the actual Psalms instead of the same 3 or 4 psalm-like songs over and over that the choir was allowed to sing in their place. We needed a homily that was a reflection on the Gospel not the latest fad on television or the most recent sporting event. Now we attend Mass at a Cistercian Abbey. The Cistercians are ascetics and while we find their chapel and their monastery to be beautiful in it’s austerity, I know other people who think it to be quite ugly. There is no stained glass and most of the art is made by the Cistercians themselves. And let me just say that not all chant is beautiful. Sometimes, a sleepy group of elderly Hungarian men and young brothers new to the monastery can really butcher it if they haven’t had enough choir practice. None of that bothers us. It’s the reverence and the Christ-centered liturgy that keeps us coming back! And, as irritating as that other church was on a regular basis, there are moments of beauty that we can find, when we need to occasionally.

BTW… Some devotees of the Traditional Latin Mass I know call the Novus Ordo the “Nervous Disorder Mass”. Lovely.

Posted by Blog Goliard on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 2:25 PM (EDT):

And it *does* matter, very very much, what those two or three who are gathered together actually *do*. What we offer to God, and how we do so.

You may indeed have been taught “an it harm none, do what ye will” by a nun once…but I assure you she didn’t get that from Vatican II.

Posted by Blog Goliard on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 2:22 PM (EDT):

Commenters continue to make good points; but it needs to be (re-)emphasized:

High standards are not the enemy.

Pride and judgmentalism are.

(And Marty Haugen.)

(Whoops…sorry, that’s both high standards and judgmentalism speaking there at the same time. See how thorny this all is?)

Posted by Jeanne Marie on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 2:11 PM (EDT):

As someone who has the task of trying to make decisions such as “which hymn do we know that fits with these Scriptures? Can the choir handle this piece or not? how can we best convey this/that/the other thing to the congregation?,” I’d like to suggest that interior disposition means a great deal to me in terms of worship, as opposed to simply assessing worship style (chant vs ‘happy-clappy’). I’ve been to outwardly “beautiful” celebrations that felt inwardly sterile to me, because of what I perceived as a lack of prayerfulness, Christian commitment, what have you, on the part of the celebrant and other ministers, whereas I’ve been to other celebrations that felt very prayerful, regardless of the humility of the offerings, building or music style. Worship style really is a matter of the “eyes of the beholder,” as another commenter writes, but prayerfulness can and should be a “catholic” value no matter the instrumentation used at Mass.

I agree completely that we need to remind ourselves constantly that “where two or three are gathered in my name, there [Christ is] in the midst of them,” no matter the style of worship in which we find ourselves involved.

Posted by Katharine on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 2:08 PM (EDT):

The Lamb of God has always been my favorite part of the liturgy because it is the most honest.

I’ve had the misfortune to know Catholic parishes in which the artistic/liturgical worthiness of the mass is seen to correlate directly with the personal worthiness of those in attendance. Typically after mass many of those in attendance stand in the foyer discussing this or that conspiracy against the church, compare notes on holy medals (of which they have a clump hanging around their neck pinned to their 5-way scapular), share blessed salt distribution techniques to keep demons away between furious whispers and hard pinches of their children who did not put on a sufficiently solemn “show” during mass, all the while bestowing group glares upon that veil-less young woman who came to mass with one of the parish’s young men.

Achieving holiness starts to resemble witchcraft rather than a product of what is in our hearts combined with God’s mercy once we sell ourselves on the idea that worthy liturgy and other outward signs expiate our sins, or perhaps make them impossible in the first place.

Posted by Rob m on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 2:05 PM (EDT):

At the 10AM Sunday mass, the pastor of my parish processes down the aisle to the entrance hymn up to the altar, and does the usual thing. Then he steps down in front of the sanctuary, and says, “Gooooood morning, church!
[Like Robin Williams in “Good Morning, Vietnam”]. Then he says, “what celebrations are we having this week?” Thereafter, individuals mention birthdays, anniversaries, etc., each punctuated by applause.
This goes on for about five minutes until we sing a final verse or two of opening hymn, and mass begins.

The greeting is a cute gimmick that quickly gets old. Much as I appreciate the attempted to connect the celebrations of life to the celebration of Mass, it gets annoying. I wouldn’t mind so much if this were done before the opening hymn.

Nonetheless, the pastor is a gifted homilist.

Posted by Blog Goliard on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 2:02 PM (EDT):

(Apologies to the comment advice above: I have no earthly idea how to compose this comment, and make it legible, without hitting “enter” to separate paragraphs. Sorry.)

A lovely piece Simcha…you can’t but help to add to the beauty in the world yourself, even when you’re addressing the ugliness.

I have often found myself bouncing between the “lie back and think of England” and the “this outrage shall not stand!” poles. I think there are things to commend in both, as well as things to beware in both.

Pride of course is the big one, as Pam’s comment above illustrated: “I think what some of us failed to realize was that we could be snobs in our burlap and felt, just as much as others could be snobs in their cloth-of-gold and brocade.” Innocuous homeliness becomes a mortal threat when ugliness starts being held up as true and virtuous, and beauty as false and a vice.

Another manifestation of pride—this one common to both poles—is when we seek to turn the Mass into the image and likeness of ourselves. Just because a traditional-minded person such as myself finds the Latin Mass to be both objectively more beautiful and pious, and subjectively more comfortable, doesn’t mean that trads aren’t falling into this pit all the same.

But at least we’re reaching out to something prior to, bigger than, and more enduring than ourselves. I think a big reason that Gen-X Catholics like myself rebel against the new Mass is that, because of the unfortunate timing of the liturgical reforms, it became an opportunity for a certain type of Boomer (with the support of their admiring elder allies) to remake the Mass in the image and likeness of themselves.

I speak not of the Novus Ordo itself—which can be, and often is, quite well done—but of the “folk Mass” ethos and its kin: songs and rituals and customs which come close to pure self-expressions; do not and never could belong to any other age or to any sorts of persons other than those who created them; and all but make bad Catholics out of those of us who differ, whether we’re bitterly clinging to our kneelers or showing reluctance to hold hands or mutely waving our copies of “Why Catholics Can’t Sing” as the strumma-strumma guitar drones on.

The irony is, of course, that in their narcissism, they wanted to bring us later generations up in, have us accept, and have us pass down to our own children this thing they had created—instead of create our own new thing that differed from theirs, or (shock! horror!) even that reached back towards the bad old pre-Vatican II Church which they had told us so many horror stories about.

Posted by Calah on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 1:58 PM (EDT):

Ah, Simcha, thanks. My husband and I needed to hear this. Badly. We’ve never been liturgical snobs until we moved to a city where nearly all the churches are ugly…and since then, I feel like we’ve lost a lot of our love for our fellow Catholics. We’ve gotten too caught up in how they don’t get it, when really we aren’t getting it. Thank you for a beautiful, insightful post. And I second Hallie. More Simcha? Yes please!

Posted by Jennifer Fulwiler on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 1:22 PM (EDT):

Simcha, this post is so good I got tears in my eyes while reading it. I have a bad tendency of turning into the Liturgy Police when I encounter liturgical practices I don’t like, completely elbowing aside Jesus so that I can devote my entire focus to judging people. My heart, too, is made of little beige bricks and burlap. FANTASTIC post.

Posted by Suzanne Temple on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 1:14 PM (EDT):

Well said. We love our less than perfect parish! My husband is a convert and his early observations of two extremes was, “If we’re going for the liturgy I like the Traditionalists, but if we’re staying to socialize afterward I’d rather be with the charismatics.”

There is something to this, and when I find myself in those situations this is more or less how I try to comport myself mentally and spiritually. I remember well one horrible Good Friday service in which Communion (I think it was during Communion) was scored by a guitarist thumping a jaunty beat on his guitar as he sang, and inwardly all I could think was: I am being crucified with Christ. It was horribly appropriate in its horrible inappropriateness.

Yeah. But at the same time, pedagogically and catechetically speaking, Suz and I are thankful every week to be able to bring our six kids to a beautiful church where the liturgy is done right, the music is awesome and there are wonderful families.

Our kids know that what we have at our parish is special, but they also know how it ought to be by experience, not just by being told, “Father isn’t supposed to say those words, there shouldn’t be twelve extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, and that lady with the tambourine hasn’t sung on key since the late 1980s.”

There are limits to the effectiveness of telling your kids how it ought to be in contrast to what they see week in and week out. I feel for the parents who have no other choice, and God bless them, I’m sure many of them do the best they can.

Posted by John Brancaleon on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:57 PM (EDT):

I think you’ve lost perspective. The “ugliness” of the mass is in the eyes of the Beholder… Does God make “ugly” ANYTHING?? The mass is a community of believers coming together to proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ and you don’t have any right to judge what is “ugly” and what is not in respect to that parish.
I’m not a fan of the traditional, high latin mass, and my parish is a happy-clappy parish. We are also a parish of service. We support poor parishes in Peru, Haiti, and South Dakota. We have youth missions to these places, several times a year. You are absolutely wrong that just because we prefer to have happy, upbeat music (along with drums, guitar and electric bass), we are “ugly”.
I will pray for you and, by the will of God, you will come to see the Light.

Posted by Kate on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:53 PM (EDT):

Reminds me of Christ’s words that it is not what goes in to a man that makes him unclean, but what comes out. You’re right - it is better to suffer ugliness quietly and with humility than to be made ugly ourselves by our pride and contempt for the efforts of others. And I love a reverent beautiful liturgy! But *I* am not the point of the liturgy, and so MY aesthetic tastes are not the point - Christ is!

Posted by Kristen on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:51 PM (EDT):

I grew up in an ugly mass parish. Now I attend a physically beautiful parish but attending the various masses there sometimes feels like attending a different church altogether. Our church was created out of the ugly past of the South (ie it was the “white church/slave-owner church” while there was another “colored church/slave church”). Since the two parishes are now one, we have one of the most ethincally and racially diverse parishes I have ever been in. There is a “folk mass,” a “Gospel mass”, etc. We had a seminarian from Colombia who did not speak a word of English whose first mass at our parish was the Gospel mass and he said he loved the music and was having such an enjoyable time he wondered if he was actually in a Catholic church. Of course, the Eucharist was there but it makes me wonder when we demand what we think is our right or correct way to worship who are we really benefitting? Are we putting ourselves ahead of God? I have attended many a Spanish mass after not being able to attend my “regular” one for one reason or another and it’s quite a different experience, but I know many a tried and true Catholic who doesn’t attend mass at all if the Spanish mass in their only option. Is the way to Christ only through ways that are comfortable, “user-friendly,” and beautiful. Or can it sometimes be the path we would least be likely to choose for ourselves?

Posted by Dave on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:47 PM (EDT):

I try to go to the EF when I can because it helps me to pray at Mass without the distraction I find at my local OF. Not every trad talks down the OF in the manner of the quote you provide. There are serious problems in the Church today and I’ll take the OF problems over the EF problems you cite any day.

Posted by Ima on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:43 PM (EDT):

I wish I had read this article twenty-five years ago!

Posted by Denise Johnson on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:41 PM (EDT):

I attend a Tridentine Mass because I believe we must offer up our best to God. The Mass is all about Him and we owe Him our best. Ugly is not good enough a sacrifice unless it is all we have.

Posted by JoAnna on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:33 PM (EDT):

Well said, Simcha. I love our parish, but the music tends toward the, um, “contemporary.” I use a tactic I learned from a Catholic Phoenix post and amuse myself by adding the words, “...Charlie Brown” after every song title (“We Are a Eucharistic People, Charlie Brown!”) as a reminder not to take myself so seriously, and to focus on the Who in the liturgy instead of the what.

Posted by MB on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:29 PM (EDT):

As usual, very well said. The devil would love for us all to create more ugliness in ourselves over a clear glass chalice or a priest in flip flops. Divide and conquer is the battle cry of the evil one. Smugness (smugity?) is our own barrier to grace.

Posted by Tony Roberts on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:26 PM (EDT):

I would rather be cloistered.

Posted by Veronica on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:25 PM (EDT):

Great piece! Whenever I encounter an “ugly Mass”, I pretend I’m one of the Desert Fathers.

Posted by Hallie Lord on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:09 PM (EDT):

“Christ is here. And if he can stand it, then so can I.”

Excellent reminder, Simcha.

I’m thrilled to see you blogging here! More Simcha! What a treat. :)

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:07 PM (EDT):

Marcia: an “indeed” AND a “harumph!” And it’s not even my birthday.

Posted by Marcia on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 12:05 PM (EDT):

Indeed! I really liked this post. Never thought of it like this. Fortunately I go to a beautiful church with a reverent mass. But the times when I have to attend elsewhere I am cringing and I feel myself becoming a snob. Didn’t look at it as a time to continue to be reverent and offer it up. Harump.

Oh, dear. Now what do I do? I left my ugly church months ago, because my faith was falling apart. My protestant husband would no longer attend with me after our priest gave a 40 minute homily about how protestants were going to hell. Same priest absolved 10 years worth of my sins without letting me confess even one. We tried for four years to pray through the ugliness of jokes after communion, public humiliation during 45 minute off topic homilies… I just couldn’t take it any more.

It’s ugly. I now drive 20 minutes to a beautiful church, which is what most of my small community now does. Either that or they attend the local methodist church. 20 years he’s been here. 20 years of ugly. What are our faithful supposed to do?

Posted by Simcha Fisher on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 11:47 AM (EDT):

Quite right, Pam. I was thinking more of what our attitude should be when we really have no choice in the liturgy or decor. But your comment reminds me that the days are coming when I will have more free time, and can probably do something to make the Church more beautiful, rather than just trying to squeeze some benefit out of it!

Posted by Renee on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 11:36 AM (EDT):

What a great piece and a challenge to us all, Simcha. I’m looking forward to reading more in this space.

Posted by Pam on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 11:31 AM (EDT):

Miguel, you might have missed Simcha’s point. Or I might have missed yours; I’m not sure.

Simcha—Yes. I remember making burlap banners for Mass at the end of TEC weekends. We knew that they weren’t gorgeous works of art (and I feel sorry for whatever Church volunteer has to eventually clean out the closets those banners are in!), but I think we thought, “We know this is humble, but because it is humble, God will love it that much more.” I think what some of us failed to realize was that we could be snobs in our burlap and felt, just as much as others could be snobs in their cloth-of-gold and brocade.

I think the question we all need to be asking ourselves is: are we REALLY offering the best we have to offer, or are we trying to read the mind of God? David wanted to build a temple, but did not have the means to do so. God was pleased with the tent as a temple, because it was the best David had to offer. Had Solomon kept the tent as a temple, I think God would not have been pleased, because Solomon COULD offer to God a glorious and elaborate and beautiful building as a temple.

There are some very poor parishes in the world, where a concrete block building decorated with burlap and felt banners would be an offering of the best. Some of those parishes might even be in the United States.

I’m not sure, though, if we need to make our churches look as poor as possible, in order to remind us of our own imperfections. Can we find the happy medium between the beautiful (which reminds us of God’s presence) and the shabby-chic (which reminds us of our unworthiness)?

Posted by Miguel on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 8:35 AM (EDT):

The sad part of this opinion piece is not that the author correctly describes some practices in some Roman Catholic parishes or that she paints with broad strokes the Latin Rite Traditionalists or Eastern Catholics, but that in both cases-both the happy clappy Masses and beautiful transcendent Masses- she identifies the Mass with the Mass goer. The Mass of the Church is meant to participate in the Incarnation of the Son of God IE God comes to us to lift us, to take us (not just my feelings) to Him. It’s not my doing, it’s not about me but about Him. The Mass, in whatever rite, however it is done, does not equal what I think or feel about it.

Posted by Julie on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 3:53 AM (EDT):

Beautifully expressed, Simcha! Thank you for reminding us that we are *all* in need of humility.

Join the Discussion

We encourage a lively and honest discussion of our content. We ask that charity guide your words.
By submitting this form, you are agreeing to our discussion guidelines.
Comments are published at our discretion. We won’t publish comments that lack charity, are off topic, or are more than 400 words.
Thank you for keeping this forum thoughtful and respectful.